Overview: In this individual assignment you will be reviewing your previous journal entries and use the rubric to develop an “Individual Professional Development Plan.”  Most Ohio school districts require teachers to complete an Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP).  If you have an IPDP, or if you have a form your district requires you to use, you may utilize this template; however, please be sure that all the elements required for this assignment are included; specifically step three.

Step One: Review your journal entries and identify two to three criteria under the five broad rubric areas that you would personally like to address in an “Individual Professional Development Plan.”

Step Two: Utilizing the Planning Template [Word Doc], create Goals for yourself that reflect your desire to improve your competencies in the areas identified in Step One.

Step Three: Review the Ohio Standards for Educators and note on the template which standard area and element connects with your goal.

Step Four: Complete the Planning Template [Word Doc] by identifying specific professional development opportunities you could engage in that would help you meet your individual improvement goals

Step Five:  Write a one – three page analysis of your professional development plan.  Use the readings from the course to support your explanation for your professional development plan and explain how this plan will help you to move up on the F.I.T. rubric.  Also, explain how you might use this professional development to reach the highest levels of the rubric and begin to become a leader in the profession.

If you would like an example, you may look at the Sample Form below.

Sample IPDP Form [PDF]

Please read the Evaluation Rubric for the Benchmark Assignment [PDF].

District Name
Individual Professional Development Plan / Goal Sheet

IPDP/MS sample

Name: Ms. Teacher Submission Date:9/8/08
Building/Assignment: Suburban Middle School
Type of Certificate/License: 5year professional
Area of Licensure: Social Studies 7-12
Issue Date: 6/10/08 Effective Date: 7/1/08
Expiration Date: 6/30/2013
Plan Type
Select one: Initial Proposal

Revised Proposal
Amended Proposal

IPDP Effective Date: From 12/10/08 to 6/30/2013
Renewal Cycle
Select one: Transitioning from certificate to license

1st renewal of 5-year license
2nd renewal of 5-year license
3rd + renewal of 5-year license

Goals
List 3-5 goals for your professional development learning. Within each goal, include
three distinct aspects: (1) intention to engage in learning; (2) focus for learning; and
(3) rationale for & application of learning. Indicate which Ohio Educator Standard(s)
each goal reflects. (See sample goal below.)
Sample Goal:
I will increase my knowledge of strategies to manage groups of students in order to
improve classroom discipline.
Educator Standards:
Teacher Standard #1, Teachers understand student learning & development and respect the diversity
of the students they teach.
Teacher Standard #5, Teachers create learning environments that promote high levels of learning &
achievement for all students.
Goal 1 I will extend my knowledge of adolescent and middle
school student development, as well as problems associated with
this age group in order to help me plan appropriate lessons
and interventions so students will be successful in my class.
Educator Standard:
Teacher # 1 Students
Goal 2
I will improve my skills for leading, collaborating and
mentoring students, pre-service teachers and peers to improve
the quality of the instructional program.
Educator Standards:
Teacher # 6 Collaboration and Communication
Teacher #7 Professional Responsibility and Growth

District Name
Individual Professional Development Plan / Goal Sheet
IPDP/MS sample

Goal 3
I will further my understanding and use of methods to
integrate technology into the classroom and curriculum for
instruction, assessment and as a tool for communication.

Educator Standard:
Teacher #2 Content
Teacher #4 Instruction

Additional goals (if applicable):

District Name
Individual Professional Development Plan / Goal Sheet
IPDP/MS sample

DO NOT MARK BELOW THIS LINE. FOR LPDC USE ONLY.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Revise/Resubmit
Revision Advice:

-OR-

Approved as written

Approval Signature___________________________ Date________________________

IndividualProfessional Development Plan

Goal Sheet

Name:	Submission Date:
Directions: List 3 goals for your professional development learning. Under each goal indicate which part of the F.I.T. rubric this will address. Also list which Educator Standard(s) each goal reflects *. Then note what possible specific activities you will participate in that will help you achieve this goal.
Goal 1: F.I.T. Rubric Connection: Educator Standard: Possible activities:
Goal 2: F.I.T. Rubric Connection: Educator Standard: Possible activities:

Goal 3: F.I.T. Rubric Connection: Educator Standard: Possible activities:

·

NOTE: If you are working in a state other than Ohio and that state has teacher standards you may use those; otherwise please use the Ohio Teaching Standards.

The Framework for Intentional and Targeted Teaching®—or FIT
Teaching®—is a research-based, field-tested, and experience-
honed process that captures the essentials of the best educational
environments. In contrast to restrictive pedagogical prescriptions
or formulas, FIT Teaching empowers teachers to adapt the most
effective planning, instructional, and assessment practices to
their particular context in order to move their students’ learning
from where it is now to where it should be. To be a FIT Teacher is
to make a heroic commitment to learning—not just to the learning
of every student in the classroom, but to the professional learning
necessary to grow, inspire, and lead.
What is FIT Teaching?
What is a FIT Teacher?
This book introduces the powerful FIT Teaching Tool, which
harnesses the FIT Teaching approach and presents a
detailed continuum of growth and leadership. It’s a close-up
look at what intentional and targeting teaching is and what
successful teachers do to
• Plan with purpose
• Cultivate a learning climate
• Instruct with intention
• Assess with a system
• Impact student learning
Designed to foster discussion among educators about what
they are doing in the classroom, the FIT Teaching Tool can
be used by teachers for self-assessment; by peers for
collegial feedback in professional learning communities; by
instructional coaches to focus on the skills teachers need
both onstage and off; and by school leaders to highlight their
teachers’ strengths and value. Join authors Douglas Fisher,
Nancy Frey, and Stefani Arzonetti Hite for an examination of
what makes great teachers great, and see how educators
at all grade levels and all levels of experience are taking
intentional steps toward enhanced professional practice.
$29.95
STUDY
GUIDE
ONLINE
Browse excerpts from ASCD books: ww.ascd.org/books
Many ASCD members received this book as
a member benefit upon its initial release.
Learn more at: www.ascd.org/memberbooks
EDUCATION
Alexandria, VA USA
INTENTIONAL AND TARGETED
TEACHING
FISHER | FREY
| HITE
Targeted Teaching
A Framework for Teacher
Growth and Leadership
Intentional and
T H E F I T T E A C H I N G A P P R O A C H
Douglas FISHER | Nancy FREY | Stefani Arzonetti HITE
IntentionalTargetedTeaching_Covers_Fpp.indd All Pages 4/1/16 9:22 AM

Targeted Teaching
Intentional and
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd iIntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd i 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd iiIntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd ii 4/11/16 11:07 AM4/11/16 11:07 AM

www.ascd.org/memberbooks

Douglas FISHER | Nancy FREY | Stefani Arzonetti HITE
Targeted Teaching
A Framework for Teacher
Growth and Leadership
Intentional and
Alexandria, VA USA
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd iiiIntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd iii 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org

1703 N. Beauregard St. • Alexandria, VA 22311-1714 USA
Phone: 800-933-2723 or 703-578-9600 • Fax: 703-575-5400
Website: www.ascd.org • E-mail: member@ascd.org
Author guidelines: www.ascd.org/write
Deborah S. Delisle, Executive Director; Robert D. Clouse, Managing Director, Digital Content & Publications; Stefani Roth,
Publisher; Genny Ostertag, Director, Content Acquisitions; Julie Houtz, Director, Book Editing & Production; Katie Martin,
Editor; Donald Ely, Senior Graphic Designer; Mike Kalyan, Manager, Production Services; Cynthia Stock, Typesetter;
Kyle Steichen, Senior Production Specialist
Copyright © 2016 ASCD. All rights reserved. It is illegal to reproduce copies of this work in print or electronic format
(including reproductions displayed on a secure intranet or stored in a retrieval system or other electronic storage device
from which copies can be made or displayed) without the prior written permission of the publisher. By purchasing only
authorized electronic or print editions and not participating in or encouraging piracy of copyrighted materials, you support
the rights of authors and publishers. Readers who wish to reproduce or republish excerpts of this work in print or electronic
format may do so for a small fee by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA
01923, USA (phone: 978-750-8400; fax: 978-646-8600; web: www.copyright.com). To inquire about site licensing options or
any other reuse, contact ASCD Permissions at www.ascd.org/permissions, or permissions@ascd.org, or 703-575-5749. For
a list of vendors authorized to license ASCD e-books to institutions, see www.ascd.org/epubs. Send translation inquiries to
translations@ascd.org.
All referenced trademarks are the property of their respective owners. FRAMEWORK FOR INTENTIONAL AND
TARGETED TEACHING® and FIT TEACHING® are trademarks of ASCD.
All web links in this book are correct as of the publication date below but may have become inactive or otherwise modifi ed
since that time. If you notice a deactivated or changed link, please e-mail books@ascd.org with the words “Link Update”
in the subject line. In your message, please specify the web link, the book title, and the page number on which the
link appears.
PAPERBACK ISBN: 978-1-4166-2111-9 ASCD product #116008
PDF E-BOOK ISBN: 978-1-4166-2113-3; see Books in Print for other formats.
Quantity discounts: 10–49, 10%; 50+, 15%; 1,000+, special discounts (e-mail programteam@ascd.org or call 800-933-2723,
ext. 5773, or 703-575-5773). For desk copies, go to www.ascd.org/deskcopy.
ASCD Member Book No. FY16-7 (May 2016, P). ASCD Member Books mail to Premium (P), Select (S), and Institutional
Plus (I+) members on this schedule: Jan, PSI+; Feb, P; Apr, PSI+; May, P; Jul, PSI+; Aug, P; Sep, PSI+; Nov, PSI+; Dec, P.
For current details on membership, see www.ascd.org/membership.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Fisher, Douglas, 1965-, author. | Frey, Nancy, 1959- author. | Hite,
Stefani Arzonetti, author.
Title: Intentional and targeted teaching : a framework for teacher growth and
leadership / Douglas Fisher, Nancy Frey, Stefani Arzonetti Hite.
Description: Alexandria, VA : ASCD, 2016. | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifi ers: LCCN 2015049292 (print) | LCCN 2016010993 (ebook) | ISBN
9781416621119 (pbk.) | ISBN 9781416621133 (ebook) | ISBN 9781416621133
(PDF)
Subjects: LCSH: Eff ective teaching. | Classroom environment. | Educational
leadership.
Classifi cation: LCC LB1025.3 .F575 2016 (print) | LCC LB1025.3 (ebook) | DDC
371.102–dc23
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015049292
_______________________________________________________________________
25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd ivIntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd iv 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org

Home

http://www.ascd.org/permissions

http://www.ascd.org/epubs

mailto:translations@ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org/deskcopy

http://www.ascd.org/membership

mailto:member@ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org/write

mailto:books@ascd.org

http://lccn.loc.gov/2015049292

Introduction: Becoming a FIT Teacher ……………………………………………… 1
1. Planning with Purpose …………………………………………………………………..15
2. Cultivating a Learning Climate ……………………………………………………..45
3. Instructing with Intention ……………………………………………………………..81
4. Assessing with a System ………………………………………………………………115
5. Impacting Student Learning ………………………………………………………..142
Conclusion: Taking Up the Challenge …………………………………………….165
Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………………166
Appendix: Th e FIT Teaching Growth and Leadership Tool ………….167
References ………………………………………………………………………………………..181
Index …………………………………………………………………………………………………185
About the Authors …………………………………………………………………………..190
Targeted Teaching
Intentional and
A Framework for Teacher
Growth and Leadership
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd vIntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd v 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

1
Introduction
Becoming a FIT Teacher
Recently we hosted a guest speaker for an evening gathering at a local hotel. It
was a great event, with stimulating conversations about teaching and learning
and hors d’oeuvres for the 160 or so people who attended. Th e speaker had used
Nancy’s computer and cables to share his stories, and one of the participants
helped pack up at the end of the evening so that we could thank our guest.
When we got to the car, Nancy realized that she did not have the connector that
allows her computer to communicate with the projector. We went back inside
the hotel to retrieve it.
When we entered the room, we saw the catering manager, the banquet
manager, and a person wearing a chef ’s hat standing at the food table. One was
literally counting tomatoes that had been left on a tray, while another counted
fruit sticks. Th ey stopped when they saw us, but Nancy had to ask what they
were doing.
Th e banquet manager responded fi rst, saying, “We always do a postmortem
after an event like yours. We have diff erent things we look for so that we can
make changes for future events. I’m looking at the places trash was left and the
number of remaining utensils. See right here, there’s a pile of trash. Th at tells
me that we need to put some sort of receptacle there, because that’s where
people are going to put their trash. We didn’t make it obvious enough where
they could dispose of things.”
Th e catering manager added, “We’re also counting leftover food. We look
for trends and then make decisions about how much of what to off er groups.
Your group didn’t eat much of the desserts, but they demolished the hummus
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 1IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 1 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

2 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
and fi nger sandwiches. Th ere are more than 20 tomatoes left. We used them
for decoration, but obviously there were too many, and we don’t need to waste
money on extra tomatoes in the future.”
Th e person in the chef ’s hat chimed in, “It’s all part of our self-evaluation
process. We learn from every group we host, and we make it better for the next
time. If people leave hungry, they tell other people, who then don’t want to
have their events here. When our boss comes around, he wants to see a clean
environment, so this little pile of trash is a problem, and we can address it the
next time we set up the room this way. And see the utensils? Th ere aren’t any
forks left, so some people probably had to use a spoon instead. Th at’s a problem.
Th e silverware plan wasn’t matched very well to the type of food served. We will
defi nitely fi x that for next time.”
We looked at one another, silently making the same connections. Although
not having a fork for one’s hors d’oeuvres isn’t too big a problem in the larger
scheme of things, not reaching students is. Not getting them to grasp algebra is.
Not engaging them in the subject matter you love is. Not preparing them to be
critical thinkers and strong citizens is. You get the point.
Th e three people in this hotel spent time collecting and analyzing data
because they wanted to improve the experience their guests had. Th e same
should be true for teachers, coaches, and administrators. We certainly care
as much about our students’ learning as the catering manager, the banquet
manager, and the chef care about the food they serve and the environment they
create. But do we routinely invest in the same kind of analysis of our practices,
situations, and outcomes? Are these based in the same kind of collaborative
and dialogic problem solving? Th e hotel team’s process wasn’t about fi lling out
forms; it was about communicating with one another to reach solutions. But, as
we saw, what made this possible was a conversation and a set of processes that
helped the hotel staff resolve missteps and identify successes.
In this spirit, we embarked on defi ning the centerpiece of this book: the
FIT Teaching Growth and Leadership Tool, which harnesses the FIT Teaching
process and presents a detailed continuum of teacher growth and leadership.
We off er it to teachers as guidance they can use to self-assess and chart a path
forward. We also share this with those who support and lead teachers as a way
to highlight the eff ectiveness of teachers’ work and ground conversations in
helping teachers achieve even greater success. After all, teachers are lifelong
learners, dedicated to continually improving their craft.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 2IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 2 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Introduction | 3
What Is FIT Teaching?
Th e Framework for Intentional and Targeted Teaching®, or FIT Teaching®, is a
process that evolved over the past 15 years. It began as a way of identifying the
fundamental components that make up a productive educational environment
for facilitating literacy development. We wanted to know: What did the most
eff ective teachers do in order to promote successful learning? How did they
plan, how did they instruct, how did they assess? What specifi c practices could
we isolate as making the most diff erence?
Let’s start with the words we selected as the name for this approach.
Th e fi rst is framework. We do not believe that exceedingly scripted or highly
prescriptive approaches are the way to go, because they de-skill the teacher
and assume that a curriculum can teach. Th ey typically leave little room for
diff erentiation or adjustment to the learning environment as teachers march
through lessons one after another. We remember meeting a teacher who got
a red card from her principal for not being on the same page in the textbook
as the other 4th grade teachers. As she explained it, “We have fi delity checks
every few days, and if we’re behind, we’re in trouble. But I had to stop because
the lesson was confusing and my students didn’t get it. Th ere just isn’t much
wiggle room, and the district requires us to move on, even if some students
don’t get it.”
Having said that, we’re not advocating for an “anything goes” approach
to curriculum and instruction. We do believe that teachers should have
a framework for their lessons. As you will read in the chapters ahead, we
are interested in instructional approaches that shift the responsibility for
learning from teachers to students in an ongoing and iterative cycle. Th e
framework we propose includes clear learning intentions, teacher modeling,
guided instruction, collaborative learning, and independent learning tasks.
Importantly, teachers mix and match these components in an instructional
sequence designed to impact learning. Th ey may model several times in a given
lesson, or they may start a lesson with collaborative learning and then move on
to modeling. Th e order doesn’t matter, but the components of the framework
do. We see a diff erence between teachers internalizing a framework for their
lessons and them being told what to teach every minute of the day.
Intentional is the second word in this model, and we selected it because
teachers’ actions matter. Th e planning teachers do as well as the instructional
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 3IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 3 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

4 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
decisions they make should be purposeful. High-quality instruction starts with
knowing what students need to learn, then moves on to creating a wide range of
learning situations in which students can engage. Intentional says that teachers
are deliberate and that learning is expected.
Targeted, the third word, is there to stress that teachers must consider the
current performance of students as well as how these students respond to the
instruction. Th ere is no reason to teach things students already know. At the same
time, it’s important to monitor students’ learning to determine if the class needs
to accelerate or slow down. When teaching is targeted, that means teachers are
working to close the gap between what students already know and what they are
expected to learn.
Two of us (Doug and Nancy) are teachers and leaders, researchers and
practitioners, and we subjected the components of FIT Teaching to the best test
we know: teaching them in our own classrooms and collaborating with talented
colleagues in their classrooms. Th e framework developed further through trial
and revision. As we learned more about what worked and what didn’t, we
honed and improved the components until they defi ned a coherent process
that includes the essentials of eff ective teaching while avoiding a restrictive
prescription or formula. After all, a healthy organization must be free to adapt
processes to meet the needs of its particular context.
As FIT Teaching evolved, it became clear that these components can
have great value to both individual teachers and teams of teachers, particularly
in organizations that are inundated with multiple (and often competing)
initiatives. Th e overarching philosophy of FIT Teaching is that it is not “one
more thing” for teachers and leaders to do but a method for creating coherence
and improvements to the complex jobs that schools undertake. Together,
purposeful planning, a well-designed assessment system, and strong instruction
make a diff erence.
Overall, FIT Teaching is a process that organizes and refi nes the hard work
of professional growth that school leaders and dedicated teachers already seek.
We all know that we can get better, no matter how good our lessons already
are. As we have noted many times in our careers, there is no perfect lesson,
and there is no one “right way” to teach. (Th ere are wrong ways, but not one
right way.) Th e FIT Teaching model is designed to keep student learning central
while ensuring that teachers are empowered to make professional decisions in
the best interests of their students.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 4IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 4 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Introduction | 5
The Five Interrelated Components of the FIT Teaching Tool
Th e FIT Teaching Growth and Leadership Tool—the FIT Teaching Tool, for
short—is based on decades of research and practice. It relies on a thoughtful
and intentional implementation of the work of teachers and of students, as well
as the collaborative work necessary for deep learning. Th e instructional process
it captures represents the tangible interactions of teachers and students in their
learning environment, whether it consists of brick-and-mortar classrooms, a
blend of virtual and face-to-face instruction, or instruction off ered completely
online. Irrespective of the instructional mode, teachers should plan lessons,
create a productive learning climate, provide learning opportunities, assess
student performance, and monitor student learning. Th ese fi ve components are
illustrated in Figure I.1.
Th e fi rst component, Planning with Purpose, highlights the work that
teachers do to prepare lessons as they analyze the standards for their grade level
or content area, identify learning targets and success criteria, and sequence
learning. Cultivating a Learning Climate involves creating a welcoming
classroom that also is effi cient and allows for students’ continuous growth and
Figure I.1 | Components of the FIT Teaching Tool
1. Planning
with Purpose
2. Cultivating
a Learning
Climate

3. Instructing
with Intention

4. Assessing
with a System

5. Impacting
Student Learning
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 5IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 5 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

6 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
development. Instructing with Intention highlights the experiences that students
have in the classroom as they learn. Th e fourth component, Assessing with a
System, targets the formative assessment work that teachers do as they collect
information about students’ understandings and then take action to close any
gaps that exist. And fi nally, the fi fth component, Impacting Student Learning,
focuses on the short- and long-term outcomes from the instruction—namely,
whether or not students learned anything.
We include evidence of student learning in the FIT Teaching Tool because
we think that it is important to recognize that teachers’ eff orts should have an
infl uence on students’ understanding. As we explain further in Chapter 5, with
our tool, “student performance” is not limited to results on standardized or
standards-based formal assessments. It includes evidence of student learning
in the short term—as might be the case when a group of kindergarten students
have mastered naming all of the letters in the alphabet or students in a chemistry
class can successfully balance molar equations—and evidence of student
learning in the long term, which could be measured on formal assessments,
including state exams or other end-of-course and end-of-semester measures.
Teachers can assess students’ long-term learning in a number of ways, so this
aspect needs to be negotiated, at either the state, district, or site level, depending
on where the FIT Teaching Tool is used. In other words, we should not be afraid
of considering student performance—the impact or outcomes of teaching—as
we learn and grow as teachers.
The Structure of the FIT Teaching Tool
Th e full FIT Teaching Tool is presented in this book’s Appendix and is also
available online at www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/FITTeachingTool . Each
of the tool’s fi ve components includes a number of factors (see Figure I.2), and
most of the factors include a number of ingredients. For components 1–4, we
provide ingredient-level rubrics for teachers and others to use to identify areas
of success and areas for growth. Component 5’s rubrics focus on its two factors.
Th e preceding paragraph makes a point so important that we need to say
it again. Th is tool is for identifying areas of success as well as areas for growth.
If we, as teachers, don’t highlight our successes, how will our administrators
and colleagues know we’re capable of providing mentoring support to our
colleagues? If we don’t seek frequent feedback, how will we know where to
focus our future learning?
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 6IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 6 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/FITTeachingTool

Introduction | 7
Using any tool for infrequent classroom observations and a once-a-year
summative conference is woefully inadequate and will not likely provide the
growth opportunities all teachers deserve. Imagine if we all ran our classrooms
in a similar fashion, with a single hour of testing serving as the only guide we
had to assess an entire year of learning. Yet, too often, the results of a single
observation are the only information school leaders rely on to evaluate teachers,
or worse, student performance on a summative test is the only thing used to
determine the success of the teacher.
The Purpose of the FIT Teaching Tool
Th e FIT Teaching Tool is designed to foster discussion among educators
about our practices and to strengthen those practices through collaborative
interactions. It is meant to be used by teachers for self-assessment, by teachers’
trusted peers for collegial feedback, and by instructional coaches and leaders to
develop the skills teachers need both onstage and off stage. Formative assessment
of teachers has a signifi cant eff ect on student learning at .90. It’s high on the
list of Hattie’s (2012) meta-analysis of eff ective practices, yet it is frequently
overlooked in favor of other classroom teaching practices and behaviors.
We have identifi ed key behaviors and practices that, collectively, are
manageable without being reductive. After all, no one is going to use these criteria
routinely if the instrument is too cumbersome. Many of the criteria require
Figure I.2 | Components and Factors of the FIT Teaching Tool
1. Planning with Purpose
1.1: Learning Intentions and Progressions
1.2: Evidence of Learning
1.3: Meaningful Learning
2. Cultivating a Learning Climate
2.1: Welcoming
2.2: Growth Producing
2.3: Effi cient
3. Instructing with Intention
3.1: Focused Instruction
3.2: Guided Instruction
3.3: Collaborative Learning
4. Assessing with a System
4.1: Assessment to Support Learners
4.2: Assessment to Monitor Learning
4.3: Assessment to Inform Learning
5. Impacting Student Learning
5.1: Short-Term Evidence of Learning
5.2: Long-Term Evidence of Learning
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 7IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 7 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

8 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
conversation and discussion. You won’t fi nd a checklist, as we have learned that
checking off boxes limits the focus to obvious items while overlooking those
that are better determined through discussion, such as what the teacher noticed
about a specifi c student or how the teacher planned to modify learning for
another student.
We think that the more often educators use and reference the tool—during
professional learning, for coaching conversations, and in professional learning
communities (PLCs)—the more likely it is that teachers will internalize the items
within the tool and continue to grow and develop as professional educators. For
example, a group of 4th grade teachers focused on one ingredient, checking for
understanding. Th ey read various articles and information on websites to fi nd
ideas, and they planned opportunities to integrate checking for understanding
in their classrooms. Th ey also observed one another and provided feedback
about the ways in which checks for understanding were used. Over time,
their repertoires of strategies and techniques for checking for understanding
expanded signifi cantly, and their principal noted that they had developed a level
of expertise in this area.
Assumptions Underlying the FIT Teaching Tool
Th e most important assumption we made in creating the FIT Teaching Tool
relates to the rating scale. Th e tool has four levels, with a Not Applicable option
for those rare situations in which an indicator (which we call an ingredient)
could not possibly be demonstrated by a given teacher. For example, one
ingredient focuses on the classroom environment. Teachers who travel from
room to room each period may not have an opportunity to infl uence the
physical aspects of the various rooms they use throughout the day. Having
said that, we realize that some traveling teachers have created amazing spaces
for their students’ learning. For example, a fi tness teacher we know brings her
own supplies, including mats, battery-operated candles, and lavender spray, to
create a conducive environment in any room she uses. We caution users of the
FIT Teaching Tool to reserve Not Applicable for very rare situations.
Th e four growth levels are as follows:
• Not Yet Apparent—Th is level is indicated only when there is a
complete lack of evidence that the teacher has considered a necessary
aspect of instruction and incorporated it into practice. Th is level should be
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 8IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 8 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Introduction | 9
diff erentiated from Not Applicable, which indicates the very rare situation
when the ingredient is not expected as part of the teacher’s practice.
• Developing—Most typical with teachers new to the profession or
new to a grade level, subject area, or curriculum implementation, this level
is marked by inconsistency of practice. It is selected when it is clear that a
teacher understands the criteria, but implementation is falling short of a
desired level of success.
• Teaching—Most typical with teachers experienced in implementing
criteria with fi delity, this level is selected when it is clear that the teacher’s
practice is intentional, solidly implemented, and resulting in success
for students.
• Leading—Most typical with seasoned teachers, this level is selected
for an individual who has embraced a particular aspect of the criterion
at its highest level and is providing support, guidance, and resources for
colleagues. Leading teachers develop learning opportunities for adults
that respect individual levels of personal practice and focus on extending
collective growth. Teachers at this level have classrooms with open doors
and consider themselves continuous learners, thereby aff ecting classrooms
outside their own.
We operate from an assumption that teachers show up to work every
day intending to do the best that they know how to do. Th at does not mean
we believe problematic classroom instruction or interactions are acceptable;
it just means we believe that people have good intentions. In other words,
we trust them. It is worth noting that trust is an important factor in teacher
(and school) improvement eff orts (Tschannen-Moran, 2014). When an
organization has high levels of trust, people feel comfortable taking risks
and stretching their practices. Without trust, people play it safe and avoid
situations that may expose their misunderstandings. As Tschannen-Moran
notes, when “well-intentioned principals fail to earn the trust of their faculty
and their larger school community, their vision is doomed to frustration and
failure” (2014, p. 1).
Th e language in the FIT Teaching Tool refl ects these positive presuppo-
sitions about teachers and teaching. As noted, the tool includes a rating of Not
Yet Apparent based on the assumption that the aspect of instruction in ques-
tion is not yet happening because the person is not clear about expectations or
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 9IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 9 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

10 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
needs support, in the form of coaching or professional learning, to start devel-
oping a given habit.
For example, one of the indicators that we look for, referred to as 3.1b in the
tool, states that “relevance is established and maintained throughout the lesson
as students are reminded about why they are learning the specifi c content.” We
assume that teachers want their instruction to be relevant. We also assume that
relevance can be lost in the details of the tasks that students complete, which
requires teachers to remind students of it regularly.
If a given teacher is observed not ensuring that the instruction is relevant,
the teacher him- or herself can refl ect on that, or an observer should ask
about that. When there is no agreed-upon understanding of the importance
of relevance, the conversation goes one way. If a concern emerges about how
to make content relevant, the conversation goes another way. And if there is
a misunderstanding about the need to remind students about relevance, the
conversation goes yet another way. Th e positive presupposition is that the
teacher who did not make learning relevant is trying his or her best and needs
support to develop this habit. Having honest, open, humane, and growth-
producing conversations about this will help more than punishing, berating, or
humiliating someone. And talking about it with colleagues and coaches is more
likely to result in change, compared with an administrator circling a low score
on an annual evaluation and then moving on.
Having said that, we recognize that a small number of people may refuse
to change, even with excellent coaching and support. In these cases, we still
assume that they are doing their best but, for whatever reason, are not interested
in the agreed-upon practices in the school or district. We recommend spending
some time talking with these people to fi gure out why, exploring beliefs and
experiences that may be infl uencing practices.
In addition, we assume that all teachers are leaders—leaders of classrooms
and leaders of learning. In creating the FIT Teaching Growth and Leadership
Tool, we wanted to recognize this fact about teachers and teaching, and thus we
reserve the highest level for teachers who lead their peers. Th is feature makes
the FIT Teaching Tool unique, because it recognizes the value of collaboration.
Rather than include a single indicator on collaboration or leadership, every
indicator in this tool recognizes teacher leadership. It is important to note that
teachers can be leaders on some indicators and perform at the Teaching level on
others. Th ere is nothing wrong with being a great teacher.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 10IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 10 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Introduction | 11
We also assume that teachers are refl ective about their practices. In fact,
we take this as a given and do not include a factor about refl ection in the FIT
Teaching Tool. We all think about our work lives (and every other aspect of our
lives) and make decisions about what could improve the quality of our lives.
Naturally, this assumption is related to the positive presuppositions that drive
our work. But realistically, we cannot imagine scaling refl ections. We are not
sure that there are “exceptional” versus “good” versus “adequate” refl ections,
in part because they are very personal and in part because refl ection is best
facilitated in collaboration with others. We do not think it is fair to evaluate a
teacher’s personal refl ections or to evaluate performance based on the quality
of interactions aff orded to that person by peers and administrators. Th us we
have chosen to assume that teachers are refl ective and that the people around
a given teacher will provide honest, growth-producing feedback on which the
person can refl ect.
Another assumption we make relates to teachers’ own learning. We do
not include an ingredient for professional development because the very nature
of the FIT Teaching Tool requires learning. Teachers who are performing at
the Not Yet Apparent level will have to learn something in order to improve.
Teachers who are performing at the Developing level need to learn to refi ne a
practice or increase their consistency in using the practice. Teachers who are
performing at the Teaching level—again, the level we expect from everyone
involved with providing learning opportunities for students—can learn
to engage their colleagues. We agree with the notion that you really know
something when you can teach it to another person; this is why we advocate
for collaborative learning in the classroom and why we believe that the highest
level should be reserved for people who can teach what they know to others.
And those who are performing at the Leading level already know that learning
is lifelong. Th us, we do not think it is necessary to include an indicator about
lifelong learning.
A Note About Teacher Evaluation
Teaching is a complicated business. It requires passion and perseverance,
expertise and eff ort. Th ere is no one right way to ensure that all students learn.
Not all instructional strategies are eff ective with all students. In fact, most
expert teachers we know adjust their instructional repertoires as they encounter
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 11IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 11 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

12 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
students who learn faster, or slower, than students those teachers worked with
in the past.
Th ese facts make deciding “how good” a teacher is right now—whether it’s
the teacher doing so for the purpose of pursuing improvement or a supervisor
or coach doing it as part of an informal or formal evaluation process—
complicated and tricky. So many questions need to be considered to evaluate
the performance of a person tasked with changing the lives of so many. It is
much easier, we think, to evaluate profi t and loss or the number of cases won or
lost or the percentage of satisfi ed customers.
As Darling-Hammond (2013) notes, “Existing systems rarely help teachers
improve or clearly distinguish those who are succeeding from those who are
struggling” (p. 1). Enter the FIT Teaching Tool. It’s designed for teacher growth
and teacher leadership, not summative evaluations. Still, we have correlated
the FIT Teaching Tool with several of the major summative evaluation tools
available, including
• Danielson Framework for Teaching (Danielson, 2007)
• Marshall Teacher Evaluation Rubrics (Marshall, 2011)
• Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model (Marzano, 2013)
• McREL Teacher Evaluation System (Davis, 2013)
• Stronge Teacher Eff ectiveness Performance Evaluation System (Stronge
& Tucker, 2003)
See www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/FITTeachingAlignment for these
correlations.
Along with these fi ve major models, there are state-specifi c criteria,
home-grown rubrics developed by individual districts, and hybrid approach-
es, particularly in schools that provide blended and fully online options for
their students. No matter the model selected, however, there are signifi cant
common alities around teaching expectations. Th us, if teachers need to grow in
a specifi c area of one of the above named summative evaluation tools, they can
use the correlations to learn how FIT Teaching supports teachers to improve
their practice.
Having acknowledged that teacher evaluation is complicated, we return to
the point that we all know that we can get better at our jobs. And getting better
requires identifying strengths and areas that need development. Unfortunately,
in too many places, formative and summative teacher evaluation tools and
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 12IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 12 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/FITTeachingAlignment

Introduction | 13
“eff ectiveness models” have been used punitively, resulting in insecurity and
fear. We believe these tools should be welcomed, because they provide growth
opportunities for the very people charged with leading learning—teachers!
A Caution Before Continuing
As we have noted, the FIT Teaching Tool is designed to encourage teacher
collaboration. Darling-Hammond (2013) states that good evaluation systems
“must be designed so that teachers are not discouraged from collaborating with
one another or from teaching the students who have the greatest educational
needs” (p. 87). We designed this tool to meet that goal. Remember, the tool’s
highest level describes teachers who collaborate and share with their colleagues.
Too many of the current eff ectiveness models and evaluation tools force teach-
ers into competitive roles, because a given teacher’s success depends in part on
the failure of others. When this situation occurs, our profession suff ers. Th ere
is simply too much evidence that teacher collaboration is powerful; in fact, it is
probably the most powerful predictor of improved student achievement over
time (Darling-Hammond, 2013). Competitive teacher evaluations reinforce
a hoarding mentality the prevents teachers from sharing lesson ideas with
one another, providing honest feedback to their colleagues, and engaging in
professional dialogues about ways to respond to groups of students who do, or
do not, demonstrate mastery.
Even worse, competitive teacher evaluation tools undermine professional
learning communities (PLCs), the very communities that we have worked so
hard to establish because they are highly eff ective in responding to students’
learning needs. As Marzano notes, school and district-level PLCs are “probably
the most infl uential movement with regards to actually changing practices in
schools” (DuFour & Marzano, 2011, p. x).
We recognize that teachers need to be evaluated, fairly and honestly. We
believe that they deserve to be evaluated so that they can receive appropriate
coaching and support. But teacher evaluation in the absence of forums for
collaboration will not achieve breakthrough results. Investing in collaborative
planning teams that discuss high-quality instruction can lead to improved
student achievement. We purposefully included ingredients that can be dis-
cussed in the context of a collaborative planning team or an entire professional
learning community. Th e examples we provide in this book often note the ways
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 13IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 13 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

14 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
in which groups of teachers engage with their colleagues, discussing the four
essential questions of a PLC (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008):
• What is it we expect our students to learn?
• How will we know when they have learned it?
• How will we respond when some students do not learn?
• How will we respond when some students already know it?
Our hope is that the necessary teacher evaluation process becomes
integrated into the professional learning that all teachers do. We encourage
teachers to share their best ideas with one another because every child deserves
an amazing education. We want teachers to understand that they operate in a
microcosm, as their actions and interactions have ripple eff ects on entire schools,
districts, and communities. And we look forward to a time when teachers can
engage in honest conversations with their colleagues about providing the very
best learning opportunities for students. When that happens, perhaps formal
evaluations will no longer be necessary, and teachers will lead their own learning
and that of their peers, striving for excellence for every student.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 14IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 14 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

15
1
Planning with Purpose
Did you know that a disproportionate number of skiing accidents happen during
the fourth, fi fth, or sixth time a person goes skiing? When we fi rst heard this,
we were surprised, as we thought more injuries would occur during a novice
skier’s initial outings. Alternatively, we could see how experienced skiers might
get hurt more frequently because they are taking on challenging slopes. But
the ski instructor who told us this explained that novice skiers with a handful
of trips under their belt know just enough to get themselves hurt . . . and not
enough to prevent it.
As novice teachers, we have all had a similar moment of reckoning. Perhaps
it occurred during your second or third year in the profession. Th e daily jitters
from constantly feeling unsure had faded, and you had begun to amass a string
of successes. And then you got a bit reckless. You were confi dent you could
wing it and decided not to devote quite as much time to planning as you had
previously. After all, you had taught this content once or twice before, and the
experience had left you feeling more surefooted.
And then it happened. You tried to teach the lesson, but your students
were unclear about the content and began asking questions you were unable to
answer. Or you had diffi culty linking the new information to the unit of study,
and students grew restless. Or the principal came into your classroom during a
learning walk and asked you about your formative assessment plan. Whatever
the particular circumstances on your day of reckoning, you learned a vital lesson:
planning is critical to the success of a lesson. Th at humbling moment reminded
you that you didn’t know nearly as much about teaching as you thought you did.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 15IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 15 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

16 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Expert educators have learned that careful planning is key to advancing
student learning. For this reason, we begin our focus on high-quality teaching
by discussing Planning with Purpose, the fi rst component in the FIT Teaching
Tool. To paraphrase the Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland, if you don’t know
where you are going, any road will take you there. Without a clear plan, teachers
and students may get somewhere, but it may not be where they needed to go.
Planning with Purpose begins with intentionality. By that we mean that
unit design should provide students with the necessary frame to link what they
are learning to existing and new knowledge. It should promote transfer. Th is
intentionality is represented in the FIT Teaching Tool as the fi rst factor of the
Planning with Purpose component: Learning Intentions and Progressions. A
second factor in this component is the teacher’s ability to identify short-term
success criteria and to plan strategically for how evidence of progress will
be collected: Evidence of Learning. Rounding out the planning component is
attention to planning learning experiences that will be worthwhile and coherent
for learners: Meaningful Learning. We begin with the fi rst factor, Learning
Intentions and Progressions.
Factor 1.1: Learning Intentions and Progressions
Planning begins with identifying the learning intentions of the unit under study
and then continues with creating a series of lessons that will ensure that students
develop profi ciency in the content being investigated. In this chapter, we focus
on the planning that teachers do to ensure that students achieve high levels
of success. In subsequent chapters, we focus on the enactment of the plans as
well as the ways in which these plans are modifi ed as students respond, or fail
to respond, to the instruction. Remember, hope is not a plan. Students deserve
well-planned and sequenced lessons that build on their strengths and address
their needs. To our thinking, the Learning Intentions and Progressions factor
includes identifying transfer goals, building schema through links to important
themes or problems, and crafting content and language learning intentions that
are lesson specifi c.
Th e following discussions of each of these ingredients include the
corresponding rubrics that are part of the FIT Teaching Tool and that describe
the four levels of teacher growth—Not Yet Apparent (NYA), Developing,
Teaching, and Leading—explained in the Introduction. (Similar discussions and
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 16IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 16 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 17
rubrics appear in Chapters 2 through 5, which cover the other four components
of the tool.)
1.1a: Identifying transfer goals
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not consider
transfer goals
during planning.
The teacher identifi es
transfer goals but does not
use them to align plans for
student application and
assessment.
The teacher plans with
grade- or course-appropriate
transfer goals in mind, and
uses them to align activities
and assessments.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
plan with grade- or course-
appropriate transfer goals in
mind and use them to align
activities and assessments.
Learning intentions are foundational to everything teachers do with
students. Th e work of planning begins not with listing the isolated facts and skills
that students should know but with determining the major conceptual processes
that lie at the core of a unit of study. Th ese enduring understandings go well
beyond skills (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). For example, learning the Toulmin
method for constructing a written argument is a skill; understanding that
these elements frame logical and reasoned argument throughout society is an
enduring understanding. McTighe (personal communication, 4/13/15) says that
teachers know that they are working on a transfer goal when they can complete
this sentence: “Students will be able to independently use their learning to. . . .”
Enduring understandings are put into operation through identifi cation
of transfer goals. Th ink of transfer goals as what one does with enduring
understandings in novel situations. In other words, they are the expression of
understanding. To extend the example from the last paragraph, a transfer goal
is that students will be able to write cogent arguments to support claims using
formal reasoning and evidence. Learners should be able to do this in a variety
of settings. For instance, students may construct a formal argumentation essay
in their English class and then use similar features to write an analysis of a
document-based prompt in their history course.
Transfer goals are identifi ed through analysis of the standards. If you live
in a place where the Common Core State Standards are relevant, some transfer
goals are identifi ed through grade-level outcomes. For instance, in 6th grade,
students are explaining the relationship between claims and reasons; by 8th
grade, this outcome has expanded to include counterclaims and evidence, as
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 17IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 17 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

18 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
well as claims and reasons. McTighe (2014) explains that transfer goals possess
the following characteristics:
• Th ey are long-term in nature; i.e., they develop and deepen over time.
• Th ey are performance based; i.e., they require application (not simply recall).
• Th e application occurs in new situations, not ones previously taught or
encountered; i.e., the task cannot be accomplished as a result of rote learning.
• Th e transfer requires a thoughtful assessment of which prior learning
applies here; i.e., some strategic thinking is required (not simply “plugging in”
skill and facts).
• Th e learners must apply their learning autonomously, without coaching
or excessive hand-holding by a teacher.
• Transfer calls for the use of habits of mind; i.e., good judgment, self-
regulation, persistence along with academic understanding, knowledge and
skill. (p. 1)
As you examine your standards documents, keep these features in mind.
We especially appreciate McTighe’s advice concerning “excessive hand-
holding” as it speaks to the long-term nature of transfer. It’s a lot easier and
faster to learn discrete skills than it is to learn how to transfer that knowledge
across situations. For example, we might introduce 6th grade students to writing
for argument through intentional instruction, including extensive scaff olding
in the form of paragraph frames, essay templates, and so on. However, those
6th graders will need much more than a single short unit on argumentative
writing to craft strong written and spoken arguments in other disciplines and
situations. Transfer goals require an investment of time to create opportunities
throughout the year for students to apply this knowledge. It is for this reason
that Wiggins and McTighe (2005) advise that transfer goals consist only of
those that will be assessed. Although argumentative writing involves lots of
important skills and information, not all of these need to be assessed.
A group of 11th grade teachers kept these characteristics of transfer goals
in mind as they planned an interdisciplinary unit on writing for argument.
English teacher MaryAnn Gates, chemistry teacher Christina Hobson, and
history teacher Antoni Caro used the standards in their content areas to identify
argumentative writing as a transfer goal common to their disciplines. To foster
transfer, they planned a two-week unit in September to expose their students
to the use of argument in each content area, and they created assignments
to promote application. Ms. Gates taught elements of argumentation in her
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 18IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 18 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 19
English class, while Mr. Caro focused on the use of argument in excerpts from
U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Ms. Hobson used science articles to analyze
evidence that supported and refuted claims. In each course, students wrote
short argumentative essays that aligned with the content they were learning.
It is important to note that the team understood that this unit alone would not
be suffi cient, so they mapped out a series of competencies throughout the year
that would continue to press students to use formal reasoning in their writing.
Th is example is an excellent illustration of a Teaching level of growth for the
ingredient of identifying transfer goals. However, the three teachers advanced
to a Leading level through Doug’s support. With his encouragement, they
individually shared their processes with other faculty at the school, using short
videos they each made to capture their instruction. Th ey also discussed their
eff orts and success at a professional learning session, where they spoke to the
rest of the faculty about their work and their students’ progress. We note this
to reiterate that achieving Leading levels is not dependent on job title, and that
sharing experiences with an eye toward developing the capacity of others is
within the reach of any skilled teacher.
A teacher at the Developing level of growth is applying knowledge of
transfer goals but is not yet sustaining attention to them systematically. George
Diaz was developing his ability to use transfer goals. He attended a summer
institute on curriculum development after his fi rst year as a kindergarten
teacher. “I can see now how transfer goals are essential in learning how to read,”
he told his induction coach. He abandoned the “letter of the week” approach
he had used the previous year because he realized that it sacrifi ced transfer
in favor of discrete skills. After reexamining the kindergarten expectations, he
identifi ed using letter-sound relationships to decode unfamiliar words as an
important transfer goal. Near the end of the fi rst quarter, he met again with the
induction coach, who asked him about how he was assessing his students on
their progress toward this transfer goal. Mr. Diaz acknowledged that although
he had completed several screening assessments during the fi rst weeks of
school, he had not yet revisited them. “I realize I should,” he said. “I said this was
important, but then that means I also have to monitor [it].” He and his coach
scheduled several assessments to administer during the second quarter so Mr.
Diaz would have a better sense of his students’ progress. “I can’t do a great job
planning if I don’t know how they’re doing,” he said.
Unfortunately, not all teachers have identifi ed transfer goals, and some
simply teach individual lessons. Marco Parma was one such teacher. Despite
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 19IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 19 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

20 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
having taught for several years, he had never considered transfer goals and thus
regularly performed at the Not Yet Apparent level. Talking with a colleague
who had focused on transfer goals piqued Mr. Parma’s interest. Th is colleague
regularly brought examples of student work to their collaborative planning team
meetings, and the work was far superior to that of Mr. Parma’s students. Th is
colleague did not brag about her students’ performance; instead, she engaged in
refl ective conversations about their learning. Mr. Parma planned a time to talk
with her further about implementing transfer goals so that he could determine
what he wanted his students to know and be able to do in unique situations.
1.1b: Linking to theme, problem, project, or question
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not link learning
intentions
to themes,
problems,
projects, or
questions.
The teacher identifi es
learning intentions that are
minimally linked to themes,
problems, projects, or
questions.
The teacher identifi es
learning intentions that are
linked to themes, problems,
projects, or questions.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
identify learning intentions
that are linked to themes,
problems, projects, or
questions.
Th emes, problems, projects, and questions can make the learning journey
as interesting as the destination. Th ey are used to foster inquiry and curiosity
about the unit of study. Th e use of such devices builds schemas to transform
isolated bits of information into a unifi ed and fl exible whole.
Th emes, problems, projects, and questions work like a magnet to draw
information together in ways that build schemas. Students might have an array
of isolated facts about a topic but no real way of gathering them together. Th ink
of a bunch of paper clips scattered across a desktop. If you wave a large magnet
near them, the paper clips form a unifi ed whole. Suddenly, what seemed like a
disordered mess is transformed. Using themes, problems, projects, and ques-
tions as inquiry approaches serves as an important way to gather daily learning
intentions into schemas that move students closer to attaining enduring
understandings, which, in turn, form the basis for transfer goals (see Figure 1.1).
Th e professional learning communities at Grant Middle School were
studying the importance of oral language in learning, and they decided to base
their discussion on an issue of Educational Leadership focused on talking and
listening. Th e mathematics department selected an article titled “Talking About
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 20IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 20 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 21
Math” (Hintz & Kazemi, 2014) for their discussion. Th e PLC members took
turns leading, and this time it was Kathy Ellington’s turn. A few days before the
meeting, she had sent copies of the issue to her colleagues, along with two sets of
questions to spur their thinking as they read:
1. Th e authors state that “[d]iff erent discussions serve diff erent purposes,
and the discussion goal acts as a compass as teachers navigate classroom talk”
(p. 37). How do you match discussion protocols/routines with your learning
intentions? How do you know you got it right? How do you know when there’s
a mismatch?
2. “Th e ways teachers and students talk with one another is crucial to
what students learn about mathematics and about themselves as doers of
mathematics” (p. 40). What do you observe among your own students? Do
they see themselves as “doers of mathematics”?
Ms. Ellington’s use of questions helped her colleagues organize their
thinking beyond simply summarizing the article. By planning thought-provoking
questions for a collegial conversation, she set the stage for a discussion of the link
Figure 1.1 | A Focus on Learning

Learning
Intention
(daily lesson)
Transfer Goal
(identified by analyzing standards or
grade-level expectations)
Enduring
Understanding
(unit outcome)
Theme, Problem,
Project, or Question
(series of lessons)
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 21IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 21 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

22 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
between content knowledge and students’ use of language and demonstrated
her Leading level of growth for this ingredient. Later in the year, when Ms.
Ellington met with a supervisor, she used this example as an artifact of her work
leading colleagues.
Another member of Ms. Ellington’s school, 7th grade social studies
teacher Lyn Jeff ries, was at the Teaching level of growth. Her students were
studying Islamic civilizations in the Middle Ages. She identifi ed an enduring
understanding that human migratory patterns ensure that a culture spreads
rapidly throughout a region. Her transfer goal was for her students to see
patterns between historical and current events as they relate to the impact of
human movement. She planned a unit of instruction designed to ensure that her
students would reach this understanding by organizing learning experiences
around a thought-provoking question. Her students engaged in an online
investigation using the question “How did the Hajj pilgrimage shape politics
in places like Spain and Timbuktu?” Over the course of two days, students
worked collaboratively in small groups to address the question and share
information with their peers. Th e question was posted in a prominent place
in the classroom. In addition, students saw the question on their course home
page each time they logged into the learning management system. To foster
transfer, Ms. Jeff ries asked her students to identify a current event in which
human movement was aff ecting a society. When she prepared her midyear self-
refl ection of her professional growth for her PLC, she used this unit as evidence
of her Teaching level of growth for this ingredient.
Down the hall, 6th grade music teacher Nate Wilcox was at the Developing
level of growth for this ingredient. An experienced music educator, Mr. Wilcox
had joined the school earlier in the year after moving into the area from another
part of the state. He was new to the practice of using themes, problems, projects,
and questions in his teaching. As the only music teacher in the school, he didn’t
have content-alike colleagues to consult, although the instructional coach
helped him build a general level of knowledge. Mr. Wilcox wrote an e-mail to
several music educators he knew around the state and asked them how they used
themes, problems, projects, and questions in their classes to facilitate deeper
learning. Th e responses he received ranged from planning a project (a public
performance), to a theme (music expresses human experiences and values), to a
question (How does culture aff ect music?). Th rilled with these ideas, Mr. Wilcox
began his journey to ensure that students developed enduring understandings,
rather than only skills, in his classes. He used these ideas to plan a series of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 22IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 22 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 23
lessons for his students focused on the question “How do music and history
infl uence each other?” Th e instructional coach used the FIT Teaching Tool to
spark Mr. Wilcox’s refl ections on his professional growth since arriving at the
school. Mr. Wilcox placed himself in the Developing category, because he had
done this kind of planning only once so far, whereas his earlier units had mostly
been skills-driven.
Next door to Mr. Wilcox’s classroom was Gary Hines’s technology
classroom. During one observation, Mr. Hines administered an online test to
his students for the entire period and therefore did not pose a question for them.
During another observation, the students worked independently on updating
their websites. Having noticed the lack of a theme or an essential question on at
least four diff erent occasions, a trusted colleague met with Mr. Hines to discuss
the fact that his eff orts in this area were Not Yet Apparent. When asked about
this, Mr. Hines said, “As I circulated around the room, I wondered whether it
might not be useful to let them know why we were learning all of this. I could
have easily let them know the question we’ve been working on, but I thought
it would be obvious. It’s part of my lesson plan. See, it’s written right here
[pointing to his plan book]: How can technology be used productively to solve
social problems? Did you think I didn’t have one? Wow! If you didn’t get it, then
how would my students ever get it? Th ese lessons must have made no sense to
them. I gotta go back and fi x this. We’ve done all of this work to fi gure out how
to solve social problems. Will you excuse me? I have some planning to do!”
1.1c: Identifying lesson-specifi c learning intentions
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not identify
lesson-specifi c
learning
intentions.
The teacher identifi es
learning intentions that may
be too broad to accomplish
during a specifi c lesson.
The teacher identifi es
learning intentions that are
achievable during a specifi c
lesson.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
identify learning intentions
that are achievable during a
specifi c lesson.
Th e third ingredient in this factor is keeping the daily learning intention
just that—daily. As we discussed in previous sections, enduring understandings
capture the big ideas that will linger long after a unit of study is over, and the
theme, problem, project, or question fosters inquiry across several lessons.
However, the lesson-specifi city aspect of the learning intention anchors
students in today’s work. Together, daily learning intentions and larger units of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 23IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 23 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

24 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
study allow students to consider what it is they are learning at the macro and
micro levels. But this isn’t possible if the teacher (1) is not aware of both levels or
(2) can’t articulate these levels to students in developmentally appropriate ways.
Excellent teachers are able to analyze the standards to identify transfer
goals; develop enduring understandings; express those in themes, problems,
projects, or questions; and then distill the needed learning into daily targets.
Th e evidence supporting the use of learning targets or learning intentions
has grown substantially in the learning sciences, as these expectations direct
students’ attention to what they will be learning and what it is they will be doing
with this knowledge. It is important to note that these daily learning intentions
form the basis for how the teacher will formatively assess learning (Chappuis,
Stiggins, Chappuis, & Arter, 2012).
Sixth grade teacher Claudia Rowe was working on her lesson plans when
she said, “I’ve got it! I want them to write a strong informative essay. So that’s
my learning intention, right? It might take them a few days, but is that what
you’re talking about?” Her colleagues, patient as ever, said, “Writing a strong
informative essay is an outcome, but it’s not what they will learn. What do you
want your students to learn on the fi rst day, and then the second, and so on
until they show you they have learned it through the essay?”
Ms. Rowe responded, “I’m not sure. No, I really think that’s it. I want them to
write an informative essay. Why can’t I just say that each day until they can do it?”
Matt Robenstein explained, “Because it’s too broad. Take it in pieces.
Could you see that students might learn to write a strong introduction on their
topic on the fi rst day? If that’s a good starting place for you, then it helps you
decide what to teach and what evidence you are looking for from students.”
Jessica Andrews added, “And if those introductions aren’t as strong as you
want and don’t meet our 6th grade expectations, then you’ll know what you
need to teach to which kids. If they get it, then the learning intention on your
second day might be for them to learn how to cite evidence for their paper. You
could do a whole lesson on that and then get them started. You’ll want to collect
their work to see if the lesson worked. Is that making sense? We have to take it
apart and decide what they need to learn each day, not just have a statement up
on the wall, like wallpaper, for days and weeks on end. It’s about understanding
the content so well that we know what students have to learn each day, and to
notice who does and does not learn it.”
Ms. Rowe, refl ecting, said, “Th ose fi rst two days would be excellent. I could
really see how to use class time to accomplish that. But then, I was thinking
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 24IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 24 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 25
that the third day could focus on explaining why the evidence was important.
Do you think that would work? I mean that they would learn how to explain
to their reader why the evidence was important and how it was linked to their
claim from the introduction. Am I getting it? And once this is all done, they will
have amazing papers. And then, sometime in the future, can I assign this again
to see if it stuck?”
Ms. Andrews responded, “Yes, I think we’re all getting it. It’s about making
sure our students know what they’re supposed to learn and then fi guring out if
they learned it. And I really like the idea of cycling back to make sure it sticks.”
High school teacher Paula Evans is an interesting case in point. She was
in the early stages of using clear, lesson-specifi c learning intentions in her
planning but was still not sure when and how best to implement them. She
met with her induction coach, Sam Carter, to discuss the use of daily learning
intentions in her lessons. Mr. Carter had shadowed Ms. Evans earlier in the day,
and now they were debriefi ng. Her coach asked about her fi rst-period earth
science class, and Ms. Evans said, “I didn’t need a learning intention because it
was a review day for them. Th ey’re taking a test in two days.”
Mr. Carter didn’t address this comment immediately but instead asked
about Ms. Evans’s planning process for her second-period class, which was
environmental science. Unlike those in the fi rst-period class, these students were
learning new content. Ms. Evans explained how the specifi city of the lesson’s
learning intention—to analyze data on declining monarch butterfl y populations
and decreased forest acreage—related to the course content standards. Mr.
Carter followed with questions about how she had formatively assessed her
students. “Th e kids worked in small groups and had to use a couple of diff erent
data sources to draw conclusions and develop hypotheses,” she explained. “Each
group submitted their fi ndings on [the course learning management system],
which allowed them to meet their language learning intention, which was
focused on a language function: to draw conclusions. I’ll be reviewing those
tonight to decide what I need to review or clarify tomorrow.”
“Th at’s great,” said the induction program coach. “Now I’d like you to
think further about your use of a lesson-specifi c learning intention in both
periods. You said you didn’t need one for fi rst period [Not Yet Apparent level
of growth] because students were reviewing for the test. But you clearly used
one eff ectively in second period [Teaching level of growth]. In both cases, aren’t
you looking for evidence of what students know and don’t know, so you can
plan future instruction?” Ms. Evans nodded in agreement and said, “I see what
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 25IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 25 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

26 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
you’re saying, but I still don’t know what my learning intention would be in a
test review lesson. Can we talk about that?”
At the same high school, seasoned English teacher Dave Franklin used
the FIT Teaching Tool in partnership with colleague Mai Lam. Although Mr.
Franklin had taught for many years, his experience was largely with 9th graders.
Conversely, Ms. Lam, although she had fewer overall years in the profession,
had spent most of them teaching American literature to 11th and 12th graders—
levels that were new to Mr. Franklin this year. Ms. Lam and Mr. Franklin planned
together and observed in each other’s classes when possible. Th e day after Mr.
Franklin’s lesson-specifi c learning intention was determining the usefulness of
research sources for a literary analysis paper his students were developing, Ms.
Lam pointed out that, although it was precise, the learning intention was not
content-appropriate for 11th grade students. “Th is is defi nitely a good learning
intention for 9th graders, but by the time they get to their junior year, we’re
raising the bar. When I’m teaching this content, I’m challenging students to
determine the limitations of the source as it relates to their essay. It’s a subtle
diff erence but an important one,” she said. Mr. Franklin agreed. “It’s really
pushing them to see the nuances across sources and how one source might
be better than another for their research,” he said. “I’m not sure what I would
have done without your help in planning. It’s really valuable, and I hope I can
pay you back sometime.” In this discussion, Mr. Franklin was at the Developing
level of growth because his learning intentions were not fully aligned with the
course expectations, whereas Ms. Lam’s support of Mr. Franklin placed her at
the Leading level of growth.
1.1d: Identifying content learning intentions
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not identify
content learning
intentions.
The teacher identifi es
content learning intentions
that may be vague or
not grade- or content-
appropriate or are primarily
centered around isolated
activities or tasks rather
than on learning targets or
enduring understandings.
The teacher identifi es
content learning intentions
that are clearly stated and
grade- or course-appropriate
and are related to learning
targets and enduring
understandings rather than
tasks or activities.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to identify content learning
intentions that are clearly
stated and grade- or course-
appropriate and are related
to learning targets and
enduring understandings
rather than tasks or activities.
Understanding the content is foundational to planning eff ective and
responsive lessons. It is hard to teach something you don’t know very well.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 26IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 26 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 27
Understanding the content well allows us to identify appropriate early lessons
versus those that are built on prior foundations. As part of the planning process,
be sure to sequence a number of lessons, with each building on the previously
mastered content. Th ese content learning intentions can be assessed for
the progression, as well as for their match with grade-level and content-area
expectations. An amazing content learning intention statement for 4th graders
that is based on 2nd grade standards will not result in high levels of achievement.
Daily content learning intentions are distilled from the standards for
the course, and they describe the range of declarative (factual), procedural
(application), and conditional (judgment) knowledge (Brown, 1987) expected
of students at that grade or in that course. Th e content is what students are
expected to learn, not what they are expected to do. Th is is an important
distinction that will play out in the other aspects of the FIT Teaching Tool. We
have to know what we want students to learn if we are going to be eff ective in
aligning instructional minutes to that expectation and in designing appropriate
assessments to identify which students learned the content and which still need
additional instruction.
A teacher at the Not Yet Apparent level has done nothing to establish a
content learning intention for the class. When principal May Yoon visited a
series of classrooms, she discovered the children in one classroom playing a
word game on the board during math time. “I fi gured we would be going out
to recess in about 15 minutes” was the teacher’s reasoning for the complete
absence of any content learning intention. No learning intention was apparent
for this lesson, even though students seemed to enjoy the task at hand.
After recess, Ms. Yoon visited the same teacher again and discovered that
the learning intention that was posted was not appropriate for the content. Th e
students were working collaboratively on a PowerPoint presentation about a
person who made a diff erence, but the content learning intention indicated
that students would be journaling about their recent trip to the zoo. Ms. Yoon
met with the teacher to talk about the content expectations, noting that the
students deserved to know what they were expected to learn. When Ms. Yoon
asked to see her plans, this teacher confessed that she wasn’t sure how to design
lessons that met the standards because her role in the past was to implement a
curriculum that had been developed for her. She asked for help, and Ms. Yoon
scheduled some time for them to meet to plan a lesson together.
Later, Ms. Yoon observed in the classroom of Vanessa Artiles, a fi rst-year
teacher who had invited her to watch her teach. Ms. Artiles told her students
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 27IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 27 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

28 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
that their learning intention was to “successfully and accurately complete the
mathematics problems on page 43 of your workbook.” When the two debriefed
the lesson, Ms. Yoon asked her colleague to examine the rubric and invited
her to self-assess. “I’d have to say I’m at the Developing level,” said Ms. Artiles.
“I wanted them to complete a task, but I really don’t know how to take it to a
higher level. I’m mean, that’s what I want them to do.” Ms. Yoon asked, “Yes, but
what do you want them to learn?” Within a few minutes, the two had polished
a learning target that Ms. Artiles planned to use in the next lesson: “I can read a
series of fractions and put them in order from smallest to largest.”
Meanwhile, in a classroom nearby, Frank Desiderio was using the tool to
self-assess in preparation for a meeting he would be having with the principal.
Ms. Yoon had conducted a teaching observation the previous day, and Mr.
Desiderio was refl ecting on his lesson. He identifi ed at the Teaching level of
growth because he had explicitly linked the learning target for the lesson (“to
describe to a partner the characteristics of yellow dwarf and red dwarf stars”) to
the science unit’s enduring understanding (“stars form and change over time in
predictable ways”). He planned to bring his unit of study to their discussion so
that he and his principal could talk about the lesson she observed and how that
content fi t into a larger overall unit.
Later the same day, Ms. Yoon met with another teacher, Avery Lincoln, to
discuss her supportive work with Ms. Artiles, the fi rst-year teacher. “I appreciate
the way you’re Leading learning with her,” said the principal. “Your conversations
are supportive but also clear and informative. You have really helped her with
her planning by dissecting the standard and pacing it out over several lessons.
I suspect in no time Ms. Artiles will easily recognize the diff erence between a
learning target focused on activities and one focused on enduring understandings.
What can I do to support your work with her in the future?”
1.1e: Identifying language learning intentions
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not identify
language
learning
intentions.
The teacher identifi es
language learning
intentions that may be
vague or not grade- or
content-appropriate.
The teacher identifi es
language learning
intentions that are
clearly stated; focused
on vocabulary, structure,
or function; and grade- or
content-appropriate.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to identify language
learning intentions that
are clearly stated; focused
on vocabulary, structure,
or function; and grade- or
content-appropriate.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 28IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 28 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 29
Language development is another ingredient in learning progressions.
Content and language learning intentions are really two sides of the same coin,
with the content element outlining what students will learn and the language
element defi ning how students might use that information or demonstrate
their understanding of the content (the success criteria). Th e language learning
intention can encompass the reading, writing, speaking, listening, and thinking
that students do. Th is intention is also vital for assessment purposes because it
signals how learning can be measured. In other words, if the language learning
intention is “to use the technical vocabulary of the stages of meiosis in a written
explanation,” then the formative assessment should be exactly that. A language
learning intention is easiest when considered in terms of tangible products but
more challenging when one is considering listening and thinking.
Th e language demands required to learn content are an important
consideration no matter what grade level you teach. If students don’t understand
key vocabulary in science, history, mathematics, art, and so on, it’s hard to argue
that they are profi cient in that subject. Humans think in terms of language,
and we expect all our students to be thinking about the course content.
Accordingly, then, we need to ensure that students have developed the language
of the discipline. And this language is not just vocabulary that students need to
learn. Th ey also need to develop their understanding of language structure and
language functions within the discipline (Fisher & Frey, 2010b). In general, the
language learning intention relates to one of the following:
• Vocabulary—the general academic or domain-specifi c words that
students need to know to be profi cient in the content area. Sometimes the
focus is on general academic terms that have specifi c meanings in a given
discipline, such as prime or expel. Other times, the focus is on domain-specifi c
terms that are unique to a discipline, such as rhombus or stoichiometry.
• Language structures—the formal grammar and syntax that users of
academic language employ. An important point is that diff erent disciplines
have diff erent conventions for the language structures commonly used. For
example, science uses passive voice more frequently than other subjects.
• Language functions—the various reasons we use language, such as
to debate, describe, explain, inform, persuade, or entertain, to name a few.
Often, as students get older and have more knowledge in a discipline, the
language learning intention focuses on the function that language is serving
for the user.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 29IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 29 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

30 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Figure 1.2 contains sample language learning intention statements in diff erent
content areas.
Preschool lead teacher Arlette Jackson saw her own practice develop
during her two decades in the profession, and she modeled and engaged in a
think-aloud about her refl ective practice during a professional learning session
she led with her colleagues. She selected the language learning intention portion
of the FIT Teaching Tool because this was a current area of study at her school.
“When I fi rst started teaching preschool in the late 1980s, nobody thought about
learning intentions,” she said. “I just did what everyone did in those days. I used
an agenda to help the children organize their time and anticipate transitions,
but I didn’t share the learning intention for anything we did. In those days, I’d
have been a Not Yet Apparent on the scale,” she chuckled.
Ms. Jackson continued:
As our profession turned to DAP [Developmentally Appropriate
Practices], I saw that I had a learning curve. We all know that language
is everything in our classrooms, and I’d encourage language use, but
not always as well as I could have. It took me a while to get a better
sense of the language progressions of young children and how to be
more specifi c with them so that I could add to the challenge as needed.
Initially, I would describe myself as being at the Developing level
of growth. My plans were vague, and I wasn’t always sure that they
were age-appropriate. With time and practice, I got better at thinking
through these progressions and using them in my planning. Now, I
would say that my language learning intention statements are directly
connected with the assessments I use. I’ll share one I used the other
day in my small groups. I think it might help my colleagues understand
why this is an important aspect of planning and teaching. [Leading
level of growth]
I’m being more intentional about teaching and assessing listening
skills. So I told the children that our language learning intention was to
listen to details of a weather report to decide what to wear. I recorded
myself reading some simple weather reports and then played them
back. Th e children selected outerwear and put them on the boy and
girl fi gures on the felt board. When they disagreed, I played the weather
reports again for them.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 30IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 30 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 31
Figure 1.2 | Examples of Language Learning Intention Statements
Content Area Vocabulary Structure Function
Mathematics Use less than, equal
to, or greater than to
compare groups or
numbers.
Highlight addition
signal words in a word
problem.
Describe the relationship
between numbers in
expanded form and
standard form.
Social Studies Name the routes and
explorers who used them
on a map.
Sequence the steps of
food production using
the signal words fi rst,
then, next, and fi nally.
Justify in a paragraph
the ways fi re was used
for hunting, cooking,
and warmth by citing
three examples.
Language Arts Use who, what, and why
to ask a question of your
partner.
Identify the verb tenses
used in the reading to
explain what happened
long ago and what will
happen in the future.
Explain what
organizational pattern
was used by the
writer and critique its
adequacy.
Science Label a diagram of the
digestive system (teeth,
mouth, esophagus,
stomach, small intestine,
large intestine, colon).
Using the sentence
frame “On the one
hand, _________.
On the other hand,
________,” students
will demonstrate their
knowledge of the
Earth’s layers.
Inform your team
members about
three ways that an
environment can change.
Art Use visual analysis
terminology (line, color,
balance, form, shape) to
describe a painting.
Use a museum-
exhibition label form
to cite a displayed work
of art.
Compare and contrast
two paintings from the
same time period in a
written critique.
Physical Education Identify body
movements used in
soccer (scissor, drag and
push, cuts, dribble).
Use language frames
to signal teammates
about changing game
conditions (e.g., calling
for the ball, letting a
team member know
when there is pressure
from an opposing
player, signaling
encouragement).
Participate in a
postgame discussion of
successes, challenges,
and action steps.
Source: From “Unpacking the Language Purpose: Vocabulary, Structure, and Function,” by D. Fisher & N. Frey, 2010, TESOL Journal, 1(3), pp. 315–337.
Copyright 2010 by TESOL. Adapted with permission.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 31IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 31 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

32 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
One colleague asked Ms. Jackson why she had bothered to record the
weather reports, when she just could have read the examples to the children.
Here’s how she replied:
Th at’s a great question, and for a long time that’s exactly what I did. But
it dawned on me that it wasn’t purely listening, because they could watch
my facial expressions and gestures. I changed my lesson so that it lined up
better with my language learning intention, which was to listen, not listen
and watch. I feel like these plans have better addressed the language that
I was focused on with my students. I think that planning this out made
me a better teacher because I had the chance to think about the language
that I wanted students to learn. [Teaching level of growth]
High school chemistry teacher David Flores was observed on several
occasions by his principal, Brianna Adams, who noticed that Mr. Flores never
posted a language learning intention and students did not know what the
language expectations of the class were. When Ms. Adams met with Mr. Flores,
she asked him about his plans for language learning intentions. Mr. Flores
responded, “Yeah, I don’t really do that. By the time they are juniors or seniors,
their language should already be developed enough to succeed in my class. If
it’s not, it’s not my job to go back and fi x it. Th at should be taken care of by the
English department.” Mr. Flores was clearly at the Not Yet Apparent level of
growth and did not see a need to change.
Ms. Adams invited Mr. Flores to observe a physics class in a nearby high
school. She off ered to cover his class for the day so that he could observe all
of the classes taught by the other teacher. In addition, she asked Mr. Flores to
watch a video clip from a genetics class at a nearby magnet school in which the
teacher focused on key terminology that students must learn. Ms. Adams ended
their conversation saying, “I so appreciate you watching that clip with me and
your open mind during our visit to the physics class. I look forward to talking
with you and seeing where your thinking is after some of these experiences.”
Several weeks later, following a very productive visit by Mr. Flores to the
other school and a great conversation about the value of language in science,
Ms. Adams had an opportunity to observe him again, and she noted that he had
moved to the Developing level. Th e lesson plan lying on the desk identifi ed key
vocabulary terms, and Mr. Flores reminded students several times to practice
their vocabulary. Ms. Adams knew that this teacher had made progress and that
the chemistry students were better off as a result.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 32IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 32 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 33
Factor 1.2: Evidence of Learning
Th e second factor of Planning with Purpose relates to the evidence of learning
that teachers plan to collect as part of their lessons. Of course, during classroom
instruction, teachers are regularly, even continuously, collecting information
about students’ understanding. Teachers also know what it is that students
should learn as an outcome from the lesson and unit. Th at last point is a critical
aspect of Instructing with Intention, which we will explore further in Chapter
3, and Assessing with a System, which we will discuss in Chapter 4. For now,
let’s focus on the plans that teachers develop to gauge student learning and the
opportunities they create to collect evidence about students’ learning.
1.2a: Identifying success criteria
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not design
summative
assessments
related to the
lesson’s learning
intentions.
The teacher designs
summative assessments
that indirectly relate to the
lesson’s established learning
intentions, permit limited
application opportunities
to foster transfer, or yield
inconclusive data around
student understanding.
The teacher collaborates
with students to design
summative assessments
that relate directly to the
lesson’s established learning
intentions and permit
students the opportunity
to demonstrate their
understanding in order to
foster long-term transfer.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to collaborate with students
to design summative
assessments that relate
directly to the lesson’s
established learning
intentions and permit
students the opportunity
to demonstrate their
understanding in order to
foster long-term transfer.
As we have noted, learning intentions provide students with information
about what they will learn. Students also need to know how they are expected
to demonstrate that learning and, even more critically, how they, themselves,
will know if they have learned the content. Often this aspect is called the success
criteria, which detail the performance expectations for students. Th e New
Zealand Ministry of Education (n.d.) provides this defi nition:
Success criteria describe how students will go about achieving a learning
intention or how they will know when they have learnt it. Th e purpose
of creating success criteria is to ensure students understand the teacher’s
criteria for making judgments about their work, and so that they gain
an “anatomy of quality” for that particular piece of work. If students have
been involved in the creation of success criteria they are more likely to take
more ownership of their learning, be self-evaluative as they are working,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 33IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 33 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

34 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
and question the assessed work as it evolves. Measuring whether a single
learning intention has been met may involve co-constructing several
success criteria. (para. 1)
Clear success criteria ensure not only that students take ownership of
their learning but also that teachers have defensible data for grading and other
summative evaluation tasks. Further, clearly articulated success criteria allow
you to engage in backward planning (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005), which results
in stronger lessons with greater internal cohesion.
Success criteria provide students and their teachers with a clear
understanding of what is to be assessed as well as how it will be assessed. Th ese
criteria can be relatively simple and designed for student self-evaluation, such as
when they are crafted in the form of statements that are oriented to the student
(e.g., “You will write a 150-word summary of the article, using the correct
terminology, and cite paraphrased evidence from the text to support the article’s
thesis”). Success criteria are also needed when the assessed assignment or
project is more complex. In these cases, a rubric is an ideal means for conveying
the success criteria. Rubrics may be co-constructed with learners, although the
teacher has signifi cant input into the design and the criteria. Rubrics include a
range of performance levels and give students clear measures of how they will
be assessed and graded. Th ese rubrics are even more eff ective for conveying
success criteria when students have a chance to view a range of quality work
samples, from inadequate to excellent.
Teacher Matthew Bradley refrained from designing any assessments
until the end of the unit. As he said, “I like to see what I really taught, not just
what I thought I would teach, before I think about how I will assess students.”
As a result, Mr. Bradley’s students experienced a hit-or-miss approach to
learning. Because Mr. Bradley did not know what he wanted his students to
learn and failed to identify clear success criteria, his students often did not
master the content standards, and their performance on common formative
assessments, designed by his colleagues, was below par. Mr. Bradley was at the
Not Yet Apparent level of growth—and he was a source of frustration for his
collaborative planning team.
Th e other members of his 7th grade social studies team were at the Teaching
level. For each unit of study, they identifi ed success criteria and created common
formative assessments, as well as summative performance tasks that allowed
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 34IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 34 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 35
students to demonstrate their mastery. Th e team liked to provide students with
choices, and they regularly created several diff erent performance tasks from
which students could choose. As the teachers noted, “It’s important that each
choice maintain the rigor of the class.”
Th e daily assessments might or might not include choice. For example,
on one day during the unit of study on Islamic civilization, the students in Ms.
Jeff ries’s class were asked to respond to the following prompt: “Th e Qur’an and
the Sunnah greatly infl uence the lives of Muslims. Explain what the Qur’an
and the Sunnah are, why they are signifi cant, and how they infl uence the
daily lives of Muslims.” Toward the end of the unit, Ms. Jeff ries provided the
students with several quotes from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and asked them
to select specifi c quotes that they wanted to explain. All students had to include
at least four quotes, but the quotes they selected were their choice. Th ey also
had to include clear explanations of the meaning of the quotes and answer two
questions: (1) What would a person say if he or she held this belief? (2) What
actions would a person take if he or she held this belief? At the end of the unit,
students were asked to select two aspects of social studies (geography, religion,
achievements, politics, economics, or social structures) and produce a report
with information about a medieval country or group that they had studied.
As part of their collaboration with students, this teaching team increased
student choice. Another aspect of their collaboration with students involved
surveying students about their preferred performance tasks. When the teachers
learned that students wanted to engage in debates, they revised a few of the daily
lessons to include debates as a way for students to demonstrate success. Th ey
also learned that students wanted to create digital products, so they added a
creative component to the fi nal paper in which students selected a visual way to
demonstrate their understanding. Some students created short videos, others
wrote song lyrics, others created digital posters, and still others used animation
tools to inform their audience.
It is interesting to note that the science teachers in the same school were
consistently performing at the Developing level of growth because they never
collaborated with their students in the development of success criteria, and their
use of generic assessment items sometimes resulted in inconclusive results.
Th e science teachers used the generic assessments for grading but could not
agree on their use to guide instruction or intervention. An area of strength
for the science team was their use of interactive notebooks, in which students
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 35IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 35 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

36 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
maintained notes, lab reports, vocabulary learning, and ideas for experiments.
Th is tool provided the science team with an opportunity to determine if
individual students were understanding the content.
Tina Setain, a math teacher at the same school, regularly engaged her
colleagues in conversations about success criteria and how to plan backward
from the learning outcomes to individual lessons. She also created a number
of survey tools that her colleagues could use to invite students to share their
thinking about success criteria and developed a feedback system for students
to share their thinking about how future assessments could be developed. As
she said, “I got a really interesting idea from students about our assessments.
Several kids commented that they were getting tired of exit slips and suggested
that teachers use the polling system a few days a week.” In the past, the math
department had used PollEverywhere.com to check students’ responses via
their mobile phones. Th ey had implemented exit slips to encourage students to
write more frequently about their understanding.
Ms. Setain asked her colleagues, “Could we try some polls every few days?
I would be willing to develop the fi rst set of questions and share them, and
then we could meet to compare the results and then develop future polling
questions collaboratively. Th is could even replace our next common formative
assessment, and we could analyze student responses for our reteaching time.”
Ms. Setain’s behavior is an example of the Leading level of growth.
1.2b: Designing evidence-collection opportunities
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not plan to
collect evidence
of student
understanding.
The teacher plans to
infrequently collect evidence
of student understanding or
relies solely on summative
assessment data.
The teacher has a clear plan
for consistently collecting
evidence of student
understanding related
to established learning
intentions.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to develop a clear plan
for consistently collecting
evidence of student
understanding related
to established learning
intentions.
As we have noted, summative assessment is important, but it’s not
suffi cient to guide students’ understanding. Teachers need systemic ways to
check for understanding, collecting evidence as the lesson progresses. Th ere are
so many ways to do this, ranging from asking compelling questions to inviting
students to write. (We will explore more about procedures for checking for
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 36IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 36 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 37
understanding in Chapter 4’s look at Assessing with a System.) In the planning
phase, it is important to remember that systematic collection of evidence
cannot be left to chance. Eff ective planning includes specifi c opportunities for
collecting evidence of student learning.
Cheryl Whitehurst was an expert at this. As her team planned history
lessons, they included options that they could use to collect data about students’
understanding. It is important to note that Ms. Whitehurst did not simply tell
her team members how to collect evidence. Th ey talked about options at major
transition points in their lessons. As Ms. Whitehurst told them, “I think we
should always try to include at least one oral language task in each lesson so
that we can hear students thinking. I see an opportunity to use Numbered
Heads Together when we move from the think-aloud to the group work. But
I also think that there are other ways to check for understanding there. Let’s
identify a few diff erent ways so that people don’t feel constrained by the lesson.”
Ms.  Whitehurst’s guidance of her team members demonstrated her Leading
level of growth.
At another school, Margo Caldera’s lesson plans consistently required
students to produce an exit slip after each lesson. In addition, Ms. Caldera
wrote probing questions into the margins of the texts she used so that she could
collect evidence about student understanding. Further, her students practiced
a number of nonverbal responses that Ms. Caldera taught them. A quick look
at her lesson plan indicated several places where she would ask students to
refl ect on their understanding. For example, she said to her students, “Give
me Fist to Five. Remember, a closed fi st indicates you have no idea what we’re
talking about. Holding one fi nger up shows me that you have a little bit of
understanding; two fi ngers means more. Th at goes all the way to fi ve fi ngers,
which means you totally get this and you could teach it to another person.” Ms.
Caldera had a clear plan for checking students’ understanding, which allowed
her to respond to students, making real-time adjustments in the lesson. As she
said, “My students hold up their fi ngers truthfully because they know I use that
information to make adjustments in the lesson.” Ms. Caldera was operating at
the Teaching level of growth.
Brian Th ibodeaux used the same method for collecting evidence for each
lesson: directing students to write a summary of what they learned. Over time,
the eff ectiveness of this approach waned because students grew tired of it and
used fewer and fewer words in their responses. As a result, Mr. Th ibodeaux
considered focusing his eff orts on summative plans, rather than asking his
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 37IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 37 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

38 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
students to continue to write summaries. He was demonstrating the Developing
level of growth.
Natalie Manchester had no plan for collecting evidence. Instead, she
explained, “I watch my students and make adjustments to the lesson based
on what I see.” Th is was a case of systematic evidence collection being Not Yet
Apparent. Perhaps Ms. Manchester was very good at catching student confu-
sion, misconceptions, and errors, but her students deserve a more purposeful
approach. Simply including a few ideas for how she would check for understand-
ing in her lesson plans would have allowed Ms. Manchester to share them with
others or obtain feedback about more eff ective ways to determine success.
Factor 1.3: Meaningful Learning
Another factor necessary when Planning with Purpose is to create meaningful
learning experiences that resonate with and engage students. One aspect of this
factor is relevance. Keep in mind that relevance doesn’t mean we have to tie a
lesson to world peace; it just needs to be meaningful today and in the near term.
Relevance increases when several processes are in place, including interactions
with peers and materials, diff erentiated instruction, and opportunities to
inquire and apply knowledge and skills. Relevance also increases when students
understand why they are asked to learn something. It is about utility and making
things interesting.
Th is conclusion was borne out in an analysis of classroom and schoolwide
conditions in middle school science classrooms in New York State. Oliveira
and colleagues (2013) used data from Regents exam results across several
years to identify demographically similar schools that performed well above
the average. Th e researchers then identifi ed demographically similar schools
that posted average results. Th ey studied the conditions that were common in
the high-performing schools but infrequent in the average-performing middle
schools. Guess what? Th e conditions that set the two groups apart were making
science curriculum relevant, fostering collaborative learning and inquiry, and
diff erentiating instruction. It is important to point out that the authors noted
that these results were not specifi c to a single classroom but were aligned to
school and district initiatives, as well as associated with administrative support,
making decisions supported by data analyses, and a school culture that values
collegiality and communication among the adults. In other words, planning with
meaningful experiences in mind is intertwined with schoolwide systems.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 38IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 38 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 39
1.3a: Designing aligned experiences
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not design
aligned learning
experiences.
The teacher designs
experiences that are
minimally linked to the
learning intentions.
Activities rarely require
students to construct
meaning through
interaction with the teacher,
the content materials, and
each other. Instead, they rely
on replication rather than
innovation.
The teacher designs
experiences that are
clearly aligned to the
established learning
intentions and require
students to experiment
with concepts and actively
construct meaning through
interaction with the teacher,
the content materials, and
each other.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to design experiences
that are clearly aligned to
the established learning
intentions and require
students to experiment
with concepts and actively
construct meaning through
interaction with the teacher,
the content materials, and
each other.
Until now, we have downplayed task design in order to examine the
purposes for learning. Now it is time to foreground the activities that constitute
so much of our instructional time.
Nancy recalls believing, as a novice teacher, that teaching was mostly
about having as many activities as possible so that students would stay busy.
In retrospect, this was the “camp counselor” approach to teaching—hands on,
even if it meant “minds off .” In those days, Nancy’s lesson plans included a lot
of worksheets, fi nger painting, art projects, and read-alouds. If you dropped
by her room, you’d think she and her students were doing fi ne. But there was
no link from these activities to anything beyond the letter of the week and the
monthly theme (apples, bears, dinosaurs, outer space, and so on). At that time
in her career, Nancy was defi nitely at the Not Yet Apparent level of growth in
terms of designing aligned experiences. Fortunately, she had an experienced
and generous colleague who guided her development, and within a few months,
Nancy’s activities were a bit more coherent. Her young students had occasional,
but inconsistent, opportunities to construct meaning. One example was when
a disastrous fi eld trip resulted in a revised plan for the following day. Nancy’s
1st graders wrote about their trip, using Judith Viorst’s classic Alexander and
the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day as a mentor text. However,
experiences such as this were only occasionally related to the transfer goals she
should have been fostering. In refl ection, she describes herself at the Developing
level of growth at that time.
Fast-forward several years to when Nancy’s ability to design meaningful
tasks had become more consistent. She considered the complexity of the task
to determine whether a given activity might be better suited for independent
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 39IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 39 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

40 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
rather than collaborative learning. Many of us have had similar experiences. We
design a small-group task, only to see some students divide the duties, go their
separate ways, and then meet up again near the end for fi nal assembly. Th at
task, for those students, was simply not complex enough. As a new teacher,
Nancy would have seen that experience as a success. After all, shouldn’t group
tasks be simple enough that success is ensured? Several years later, however,
she knew better. If a learning experience is not complex enough, students don’t
have much reason to talk with one another. Her ability to raise the level of
complexity grew, and she would describe herself as being at the Teaching level
of growth in these instances.
Nancy had the opportunity to repay her mentor when she welcomed
teachers new to the grade level. Whether her role was a formal one (grade-
level chair or support provider for the induction program) or an informal one
(as a grade-level colleague), Nancy met and planned with fellow teachers.
One memorable example of her Leading level of growth was when the school
engaged in a curriculum-mapping process to implement a new reading
program the district had purchased. She and her colleagues noted when and
where meaningful experiences and interactions were in evidence and created
additional Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English opportunities
with the school’s English language learners in mind.
An important consideration for this ingredient of the growth tool is the
expectation for interaction. Th e meaningful experiences that teachers plan
should involve some type of interaction. Students can interact with each other,
the teacher, or the content, and a host of instructional routines are useful for
this. We do not prescribe any particular routines. Some teachers like to use
reciprocal teaching and book clubs. Others like cognitively guided instruction,
whereas others prefer inquiry approaches. Th e key is that students are actively
constructing meaning through their interactions. Th ese experiences become
meaningful when they support the transfer goals that have been identifi ed.
Th is situation was not the case in Brad Farragut’s classroom. He routinely
asked his students to read chapters of their textbook and then answer
questions at the back of the book. Mr. Farragut argued that his students
were interacting with the content materials, which was partly true. But if
they could essentially teach the content to themselves using this approach, it
was probably not appropriately complex and likely not very meaningful. It’s
not that independent tasks are inappropriate, but students need a range of
experiences so that they learn at high levels. Th e plans that teachers develop
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 40IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 40 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 41
should include opportunities for student interaction with content and peers in
order to support transfer goals.
Shawna Cartwright designed tasks that were linked to the learning
intentions but required limited interactions. For example, she always had
a listening station in her class. Listening stations can be a great learning
experience for students—or not. In Ms. Cartwright’s class, the content of the
listening station was linked with the learning intention for the day, but students
were not expected to talk with one another as part of this experience. What
could be a great learning opportunity was instead a passive experience in
which some students learned and others did not. Ms. Cartwright was at the
Developing level. Her teaching partner, Bonnie Schindler, also used a listening
station with the same content, but she invited her students to pause the digital
or video recording to talk about their responses. Ms. Schindler’s students asked
each other a lot of questions and, compared with Ms. Cartwright’s students,
took much better notes during their listening-station time, which resulted in
improved understanding of the content. Ms. Schindler was at the Teaching
level. Designing aligned experiences has less to do with the activity itself than it
does with the interaction planned to accompany the activity.
1.3b: Planning for diff erentiation
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not differentiate
instruction.
The teacher has a limited
differentiation repertoire
or provides differentiation
that is only loosely based on
formative assessment data.
The teacher designs for
differentiated instruction
based on formative
assessment data, using
fl exible grouping and
providing a variety of
experiences that meet
student needs or interests.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to design for differentiated
instruction based on
formative assessment data,
using fl exible grouping
and providing a variety
of experiences that meet
student needs or interests.
Diff erentiating instruction to meet the needs of individual students
has been fi rmly established as wise practice for several decades (Tomlinson
& Imbeau, 2010). Rooted in gifted education, the intention of diff erentiation
is to ensure that students achieving above, at, and below grade level have an
opportunity to access content and advance their learning. Diff erentiation is
often delegated to the instructional dimension of teacher evaluation systems.
In our growth tool, we have placed it within the planning phase, because
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 41IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 41 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

42 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
diff erentiation should be proactive, not strictly reactive. Tomlinson (2015), in
her study of eff ective mixed-ability classrooms, found that
teachers in [eff ective] schools typically “teach up,” planning fi rst for
advanced learners, then scaff olding instruction to enable less advanced
students to access those rich learning experiences. Further, they
extend the initial learning opportunities when they are not suffi ciently
challenging for highly advanced learners. In those schools, achievement
for the full spectrum of learners—including advanced learners—rose
markedly when compared to peer schools where this approach was not
pervasive. (p. 26)
As Tomlinson (2000) notes, teachers can diff erentiate at least four class-
room elements based on student readiness, interest, or learning profi le:
• Content—what the student needs to learn or how the student will get
access to the information
• Process—activities in which the student engages in order to make sense
of or master the content
• Products—culminating projects that ask the student to rehearse, apply,
and extend what he or she has learned in a unit
• Learning environment—the way the classroom works and feels
Accordingly, teachers should consider a range of options that demonstrate their
diff erentiation across these dimensions. In other words, eff ective teaching is
more than altering an assignment for a given student.
Some teachers, including Amanda Stark, don’t “believe” in diff erentiating
instruction. She said, “Students have to demonstrate mastery in my class if they
want a grade.” Other teachers, including Arnold Tillman, are not sure how to
diff erentiate. As he said, “I am not sure what I’m allowed to do and still give
students a grade for the class. I mean, I want to support my students, but I am
not sure how far is too far.”
Both of these teachers are at the Not Yet Apparent level of growth, but for
diff erent reasons. Both of them need to develop their skills in planning for all
students, including plans for diff erentiation. Th e path to get there will likely be
diff erent. Ms. Stark fi rst needs help to confront her beliefs and values, whereas
Mr. Tillman needs additional professional development.
Eff ective diff erentiation is based on formative assessment. Teachers use
hard and soft data to construct fl exible groups and design appropriate tasks
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 42IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 42 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Planning with Purpose | 43
that move students’ learning forward. As part of a department meeting, visual
arts teacher Pam Unger started the conversation by saying, “I’m going to
describe my current practice right now at Not Yet Apparent. It’s not that I don’t
diff erentiate. I do. But I’ve always relied on interest rather than any kind of
information.” She showed a recent digital design assignment she gave students
and explained, “I always structure assignments based on choice. I’m not sure
how I could formatively assess students based on their choices.”
Daniella Smithson, a newer colleague to the department, off ered a
suggestion. “Let me show you what I’ve been doing,” she said. “Whenever I
start a new unit, I have students complete a short online quiz and a survey of
interest.” She was at the Leading level of growth and regularly off ered support
like this to her colleagues.
Musical director Walter Yates said, “For me, formative assessment is part
and parcel of what I do, although I hadn’t thought of it in those terms before
we started studying it more closely.” He continued, “I put myself at the Teaching
level of growth here, because I have students audition regularly to determine
their position in the orchestra. Based on their seating, I do lots of small-group
instruction. I also make sure that the fi rst chairs in each section are coteaching
with me.”
Responding to Mr. Yates’s comments, dance teacher Trina Knox said,
“Wow, I hadn’t thought about auditions as part of my formative assessment. I
don’t think I do it enough. I originally put myself in the Teaching category, but
now I’m going to change that to the Developing level of growth. I used tryouts at
the beginning of the school year, but those groups have remained the same since
then, and now it’s December. And truthfully, the groups are all doing the same
thing,” she confessed. “I need to rethink how I’m using formative assessment in
my classes.”
Summing Up
Th e fi rst component of the FIT Teaching Tool focuses on the backstage
planning processes that teachers use to guide student learning. Evidence for
this component, and each of the factors that make up the component, can
include documents and interviews, as well as observations. As we have noted
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 43IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 43 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

44 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
throughout this chapter, teachers who plan collaboratively with their peers
are more likely to develop stronger lessons and end up at the Leading level.
As Darling-Hammond (2013) notes, “Peer learning among small groups of
teachers was the most powerful predictor of improved student achievement
over time” (p. 60). Simply said, we’re better when we collaborate with others,
which is why our highest level of growth is reserved for teachers who lead the
learning of peers.
In addition to the planning that teachers engage in, some of the ingredients
discussed in this chapter require that teachers invite students into learning.
Eff ective teachers know what they want students to learn, and why, and explain
that in such a way that students understand it. Th ey also align the meaningful
experiences students have and identify ways that students will demonstrate
their understanding. Student performance on each success criterion should be
used formatively to infl uence future instructional planning.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 44IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 44 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

45
2
Cultivating a
Learning Climate
We selected the word cultivating quite intentionally for this component of the
FIT Teaching Tool because it captures two essential truths: (1) a positive class-
room climate requires careful preparation; and (2) that kind of classroom climate
requires regular tending. Even the most knowledgeable teacher cannot perform
at optimum levels without developing positive student-teacher relationships,
considering the growth of the whole child (and not just progress in academic
performance), and providing a safe and effi cient environment in which students
can work, take risks, engage in productive struggle, and fi nd success.
Th e social health of the school and its classrooms is aff ected by the
relationships between adults and students, not to mention the welcoming
environment extended to families. Unfortunately, these conditions are
sometimes viewed as being “soft” and not worthy of the same level of attention
(and resources) dedicated to test scores and teacher quality. Although these
climate-related elements alone will not directly change student achievement,
their absence renders other initiatives ineff ective. Th e Consortium on Chicago
School Research followed schools in their district of more than 400,000 students
for 20 years, beginning in 1988. Th ey identifi ed 100 elementary schools that met
with success and 100 that did not. Th e Chicago group found that socioeconomic
status, mobility, and neighborhood crime were not predictive, as schools that
succeeded and those that didn’t often shared similar circumstances. However,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 45IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 45 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

46 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
the researchers (Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010) found
fi ve conditions present in the successful schools:
• A welcoming environment for all stakeholders
• A safe and stimulating classroom climate
• Quality instruction
• An emphasis on developing the professional capacity of all educators
• Strong principal leadership
Although these fi ndings are not startling, it is the internal relationship
among the fi ve conditions that proved to be critical. Th e researchers found that
“a material weakness in any one ingredient means that a school is very unlikely
to improve” (Bryk, quoted in Viadero, 2010, p. 1). Too often, our society hopes
that a single factor—a magic bullet—will move the needle, and we devote
human and fi scal resources toward making it happen. Yet the Consortium on
Chicago School Research’s fi ndings challenge this assumption and provide
strong counterevidence that a sustained and comprehensive approach, which
includes unswerving attention to climate, instruction, and the development of
the leadership of teachers and administrators, is what matters.
It is this intertwined relationship that underpins the design of the FIT
Teaching Tool. Th e previous and upcoming chapters focus on aspects of
quality instruction, including planning and assessment. Each factor positions
teacher leadership as the highest expression of professional excellence. In this
chapter, we turn our attention to the learning climate in order to examine two
of the fi ve factors identifi ed by the researchers: creating an environment that
is welcoming for all and is safe and stimulating. In the Cultivating a Learning
Climate component of the tool, we have recast these qualities across three
factors. Th e fi rst is Welcoming (2.1), expressed in the way the classroom
environment is constructed and through investment in relationships with
students and families. Th e second factor is Growth Producing (2.2), as teachers
use their interactions to build their students’ agency and identity, encourage
academic risk taking, and repair harm. Th e fi nal factor in this component is
Effi cient (2.3), which is key to creating an orderly and stimulating environment.
We have included record keeping as an ingredient in this component, because
so much of the information that students, colleagues, and families need begins
with the teacher’s ability to organize and furnish this information in a timely
and accurate way. Even in otherwise welcoming and nurturing classrooms,
poor organization undermines these important relationships and stunts student
growth, family support, and teacher collaboration.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 46IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 46 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 47
Factor 2.1: Welcoming
Th ink back to an occasion when you felt welcomed. Maybe you were greeted
with a smile, asked about your personal state, off ered something pleasing, and
guided to your next destination. Regardless of the circumstances (arriving
home after work, entering a department store, or arriving at a professional
conference), the positive way that others reacted to your presence allowed you
to set aside other concerns. Most important, you felt that you belonged.
Now contrast this with a time you felt unwelcome. If you’ve ever hosted
a teenager’s sleepover, you’ll understand what we mean. If you’re not bringing
cold drinks and treats, you’re likely to be greeted with exasperation, if you’re
greeted at all. Any answers to your questions are short and blunt. Th e unspoken
message: You don’t belong. When are you leaving?
Belongingness at school is linked to both learning outcomes and motivation
to learn in elementary (e.g., McMahon, Wernsman, & Rose, 2009) and secondary
(e.g., Goodenow, 1993) classrooms. Membership alone does not automatically
result in a sense of belonging (the slumber party example comes to mind; you
know you don’t belong, even though it’s your house!). Similarly, the presence of a
child’s name on the class roster doesn’t mean that child will feel she belongs. Th e
teacher’s disposition to build and establish a positive relationship with the child
is a key way to signal belonging to the rest of the group. We call this disposition
positive regard—the fi rst ingredient of the Welcoming factor. Th e classroom’s
physical environment—the second ingredient—further enhances the teacher’s
intentions for providing a safe, orderly, and welcoming space for learning. Th e
third ingredient is the community building that occurs as the teacher develops
relationships inside the classroom and with each child’s family.
2.1a: Positive regard
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
has strained
relationships
with students or
does not hold
students in high
esteem.
The teacher exhibits positive
regard but has limited
interactions with more
challenging students.
The teacher actively seeks
to establish and maintain
positive relationships with
all students by showing
interest in their academic
lives, interests, and
aspirations.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to establish and maintain
positive relationships with
all students by showing
interest in their academic
lives, interests, and
aspirations.
Positive regard encompasses a collection of attitudes and behaviors that
eff ective teachers exhibit toward their students. Th ese include greeting students,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 47IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 47 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

48 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
using their names, and demonstrating interest in them as people. We hear
these expressions of positive regard in the halls of the school where we work
every day. As students return from their internship experiences, one of our
colleagues always asks, “How did you make a diff erence today?” Our principal
greets students every morning with the words, “Welcome home.” An English
teacher stands in the doorway of her classroom during passing period and says
hello to each student, often adding the reminder, “Your future is waiting for you
right in here.” All of us can come up with dozens of examples of ways in which
we demonstrate positive regard for students.
But these practices are more diffi cult to apply with students who struggle
behaviorally. Although the expectation is that we treat all students equally, in
practice, teachers often do not. We behave diff erently with students who are
more challenging. We stand farther away from them, talk with them less, make
less eye contact, call on them less during class, and hold lower expectations
for them (Good & Brophy, 2007). What’s more, students pick up on these
diff erential expectations, which leads to an even wider achievement gap within
the class as the year progresses (Brattesani, Weinstein, & Marshall, 1984).
Teachers at Prendergast High School turned their attention to positive
regard as a means to address diff erential teacher expectations. Th e school
adopted several practices that communicated a higher degree of positive regard
to all students, with special attention devoted to more challenging learners.
Each cycle of their professional learning included a specifi c set of teacher
behaviors. For example, the planning week session was dedicated to back-to-
school topics and included positive regard practices such as standing at the
doorway of the classroom to greet students, as well as methods for learning
students’ names.
Another session a few weeks later concerned developing student profi les
and asked teachers to assess whether they had conducted at least one short
conference with each student. Sgt. Kendra Garvey, a JROTC instructor at the
school, adopted a number of practices to increase her ability to exhibit positive
regard for her cadets. “Lots of people think that [JROTC] is all about barking
at kids and treating them like they’re in boot camp,” she chuckled. “Too many
movies.” Although her program emphasized personal discipline and professional
behaviors, Sgt. Garvey recognized that these need to be taught. “I want cadets
to see that the procedures we utilize come from somewhere,” she said.
Noting that some of her students initially lacked self-discipline, she used
positive statements to instill a sense of camaraderie and teamwork. When she
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 48IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 48 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 49
met with her assistant principal, Owen Patrick, to debrief after an observation,
he asked her for information about a quiet discussion she had with three male
cadets near the end of class. Sgt. Garvey explained that the students were
considering getting tattoos. She explained the pertinent U.S. Army regulations
and then asked the cadets to discuss why they wanted to get tattoos. “Now, I
don’t approve,” she said, “but it’s important that I hear them out and that they
don’t feel like there’s all this disapproval coming from me.”
Sgt. Garvey told Mr. Patrick that the boys had explained that all the male
members of their families had tattoos and that they wanted to get them too.
“Th ese boys’ families are from Fiji and Tonga, and tattoos play a ritualistic
and spiritual role in their lives,” she said. “If I hadn’t taken the time to listen, I
would have just assumed that they wanted them for the usual teenage reasons.
Th e real reason they were asking was because they wanted to honor their
families but also adhere to the U.S. Army regulations. So I contacted a friend
of mine at the local recruiting offi ce who is of Samoan descent, and he’s going
to meet with the boys to discuss this. I’m going to sit in on this conversation
so I can learn, too.” Sgt. Garvey, at the Teaching growth level, is displaying
the personal regard she has for her cadets by approaching them with positive
presumptions, listening to their concerns, and seizing opportunities to become
more culturally competent.
Several weeks into the school year, chemistry teacher Martin Scott was
transferred to Prendergast from another high school. A veteran teacher, Mr.
Scott had taught at a number of schools, and he anticipated that Prendergast
would be similar to the others. Th erefore, he was surprised when Mr. Patrick
met with him during his fi rst week at the school to review both the FIT Teaching
Tool and the school’s focus on creating a welcoming environment. During the
next quarter, Mr. Scott was observed twice, and he and Mr. Patrick met after
each observation to debrief. Although Mr. Scott’s planning and instruction were
solid, his performance on positive regard was lacking. “I noticed that you rarely
talked with students before the bell rang or after class,” the assistant principal
commented. “When you did talk to Ricardo, it was to give a short answer to his
question about homework, but nothing else. I’m interested in your thoughts,”
Mr. Patrick continued. “How do you believe you’re exhibiting positive regard?”
What followed was an extended conversation about building relationships
with students. Th e teacher didn’t hold much stock in it, reminding the
administrator that his focus was on the content. “Th at kind of relationship
building won’t happen to them in college,” Mr. Scott pointed out. “I’m getting
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 49IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 49 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

50 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
them ready for the classes they’ll need to take.” Mr. Patrick reminded him
that building relationships with students would help him tailor his chemistry
instruction so that it would resonate more with his students. “For instance, I
wonder if you know that two of the students in the class I sat in on, Ken and
Travis, are members of the school’s rocket club. Th ey could have contributed
to today’s discussion about chemical combustion,” Mr. Patrick noted. Th e
assistant principal cited several other connections to specifi c students that
might have enriched the lesson. “I know you’re still new here, and it’s a big
school, but your outreach to students can make a diff erence,” said Mr. Patrick.
Th e chemistry teacher agreed that he was at the Not Yet Apparent growth
level when it came to positive regard and expressed interest in developing his
skills in this area. “I’d like to arrange time for you to work with Ms. Leung,
the instructional coach for science,” the administrator said. “I appreciate your
willingness to get better at this.”
Mimi Leung met with Mr. Scott and also with Ulysses Robertson, an
earth science teacher previously identifi ed as being at the Developing growth
level. Mr. Robertson had consistently struggled throughout his four years at
Prendergast to form positive relationships with some of his students, especially
those with more challenging behavior. Determined to improve his ability to
reduce problematic behaviors in his class, Mr. Robertson had been collaborating
with the instructional coach to proactively develop relationships with students
who challenged him. With Ms. Leung’s guidance, Mr. Robertson identifi ed
four students in two periods and was targeting them for his positive regard
eff orts. For the previous two weeks, he had made it a point to stand closer to
these students as he taught, call on them more frequently, and add positive
statements to his replies.
In the three-way meeting with Mr. Robertson and Mr. Scott, Ms. Leung
began by asking the earth science teacher to talk about his student observation
eff orts. “I like to call it my campaign,” Mr. Robertson said. “I have to say I didn’t
expect much, but there’s been a real reduction in the disruptive behaviors from
these four students.” Th e instructional coach pressed him for evidence, and
he showed her the tally sheet he had developed. “I tried to keep track of the
number of times I’d have to reprimand them, and I also compared it to students
in my other periods whom I didn’t target but would have,” he said. “I like data.”
Th is information captured the interest of Mr. Scott, the chemistry teacher.
“Can you give me some examples of what you did?” he asked. “Th ese numbers
are impressive.” Th e earth science teacher shared several strategies but noted
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 50IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 50 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 51
that the most eff ective one was the 2 x 10 method: spend 2 minutes a day, for
10 consecutive school days, talking to the targeted students about anything but
school. “Th e kids were kind of suspicious at fi rst, but I’ve learned a lot about
them. For instance, I found out that Yessenia [a targeted student] is the oldest
of fi ve and gets up at 3:30 a.m. to get the little ones ready. Her mom works the
night shift, so Yessenia needs to be there for them. No wonder she’s so tired in
my class.” Ms. Leung asked the earth science teacher about his next steps. He
didn’t hesitate. “I’m going to do the same thing in my other periods.” Mr. Scott
indicated that he’d like to do something similar. “We have lunch at the same
time, Ulysses. Can I talk with you about some of these ideas?”
Ms. Leung, the instructional coach, was released two periods each day
to work with her colleagues in the science department. She was collecting
information about successes to profi le in the next professional learning session
that she and other part-time instructional coaches from diff erent disciplines
were organizing. Her plan was to recruit Mr. Robertson and others who
were experiencing success to share their insights. “We want to share these
success stories, but we’ll also want to make time for all of us to talk about
the continued struggles they’re having. I’ll have the room set up so we can sit
by departments, and each coach will sit with his or her team to facilitate the
conversation,” Ms. Leung explained. “We’re not going to grow as a school if we
don’t acknowledge and address the diffi culties.” At the Leading growth level
for this ingredient, Mimi Leung was engaged in building the capacity of her
departmental colleagues.
2.1b: Physical environment
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The classroom
is disorganized,
cluttered, or dirty
and negatively
affects student
learning.
The teacher has designed
but has diffi culty
maintaining an inviting
classroom environment
that will support student
learning and movement.
The teacher designs and
maintains an inviting
classroom environment that
supports student learning
and movement.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to design and maintain
an inviting classroom
environment that supports
student learning and
movement.
Th e learning environment lies at the nexus of two aspects: the social
aspect and the physical layout (Lippman, 2013). Th e classroom’s physical spaces
convey a welcoming atmosphere when they are designed with learners’ usage
and interactions in mind. Although the practice is commonplace now, schools
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 51IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 51 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

52 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
did not outfi t classrooms specifi cally for children until the 20th century, when
educator Maria Montessori introduced furniture scaled to the size of her young
students. Beyond furniture, the bulletin boards, signage, and organization of
materials all signal to students how they will be working throughout the period
or day. Th ese touches should be developmentally appropriate, to be sure, but
learners of any age appreciate when their names are displayed. Evidence of stu-
dent work further communicates that the people in the classroom are valued.
Finally, the room should be clean and tidy; a dirty or chaotic environment inter-
feres with the effi ciency of the work and telegraphs a general disregard for the
room and for its occupants. A study of the perception of secondary students
on the condition of their physical environment found that their negative per-
ceptions were associated with higher rates of absenteeism and lower reported
levels of motivation and participation (Asiyai, 2014).
We don’t mean that rooms must be as neat as a pin at all times, or that the
décor needs to be particularly fashionable. But rooms that are dirty, disheveled,
and lacking in any kind of acknowledgment of the people who spend hundreds
of hours there each year can inhibit learning. Although the overall design of the
room and the quality of its furnishings are outside the direct infl uence of the
teacher, other elements, such as the following, are not:
• Movement and circulation patterns can be established to facilitate
access to materials and one another.
• Common and individual spaces can promote community while
preserving ownership of place.
• Arrangements of furniture that can be easily reconfi gured for small-
group learning can promote collaboration among students.
• Pleasing colors can be used to stimulate and organize.
Th ese elements can assist or hinder a teacher’s work as well. When teachers
have diffi culty moving around the room, or when it is too much trouble to
reconfi gure the furniture for collaborative learning, they are forced to teach
with fewer tools. Middle school instructional coach Sue McIntyre worked with
Ashira Abbott during planning week on classroom reconfi guration. During the
previous school year, Ms. Abbott had garnered a Not Yet Apparent growth level
for this ingredient on her summative evaluation. She and her administrator
had agreed that a goal for the next school year was to change the physical
environment. A veteran teacher, Ms. Abbott had a reputation for maintaining
a classroom packed with books and other materials. Previous observations had
noted that a signifi cant number of instructional minutes were routinely lost as
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 52IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 52 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 53
she looked for items. And although she was a caring and involved teacher, Ms.
Abbott was impeded from making contact with students because it was too
diffi cult to move about the room.
“But I love all my books! I’m an English teacher!” she had protested.
However, she admitted that students and colleagues had complained over the
years and that an infestation of silverfi sh in the papers and books made students
reluctant to handle materials. Over the summer, the facilities manager worked
with her to move unnecessary items out of the classroom and had the room
professionally treated by district personnel. Ms. McIntyre, the instructional
coach, was paid for a day during the summer to help Ms. Abbott sort through
items and donate or dispose of those she didn’t need. Th e teacher was pleased
with the progress she was seeing and spent an additional day covering bulletin
boards with fresh paper so she could display student work. During planning
week, she and Ms. McIntyre rearranged furniture to promote table discussions
and placed smaller but more cohesive book sets on the shelves.
Th e teacher and the coach met again after the fi rst week of classes to
discuss the changes. “Th e fi rst thing I noticed is that I’m spending more time in
diff erent places in the room. I’ve always used a seating chart, but the extra space
has made it easier to circulate,” Ms. Abbott said. Both women did a prearranged
“ghost walk” (our term for visiting empty classrooms) to get more ideas for
further personalizing the room. Ms. Abbott took notes about using student
names and displaying student work. Th e instructional coach suggested that the
English teacher put reminders on her smartphone so that she would remember
to change the work regularly. “Last year on my evaluation the principal wrote
that I had student work from October still hanging up in May. Th at was
embarrassing,” Ms. Abbott confessed.
When Ms. Abbott was visited a few weeks later, she was tagged at the
Developing level for this ingredient. “It’s starting to get cluttered in here again, but
I’m on it,” she said. “I don’t want to fall back into my old ways.” She added that at
the last post-observation debriefi ng, she decided to collect circulation data in the
second quarter to track which books were being selected more often than others.
Middle school mathematics teacher Luis Calderón transformed his
classroom each fall into a physical environment where students were invested in
taking ownership. During the fi rst week, he took a photograph of each student
and created a wall display, organized by period, of the names and interests of
each student. “I load these photos into my digital attendance and seating charts,
so that I can learn everyone’s names. Later in the year, when I have a substitute,
they can use the same tools to manage the class a bit better,” he said. Because
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 53IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 53 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

54 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
he taught six periods a day, he couldn’t have everyone’s work on display at the
same time, so he rotated students’ work. Every two weeks, he changed a bulletin
board titled “Spotlight on Period ___ Mathematicians” to feature their written
work. For open house and family math nights, he had his students make a short
video of themselves talking about an aspect of mathematics and assigned a QR
(Quick Response) code for each so that families could view their own children
discussing their learning. Mr. Calderón’s classroom had stations highlighting
historical fi gures in mathematics and a popular one about mathematical failures
that led to other inventions. “Th e one I’ve got up right now is about how a failed
formula for an adhesive at 3M led to the development of their Post-it notes
products,” he said. With Mr. Calderón at the Teaching level, his students entered
a classroom each day that was tailored to the needs of young adolescents to
explore and to see themselves as mathematicians.
Another middle school educator, social studies teacher Leticia Rogers, sat
on the advisory board of her district’s induction program. She had a particular
interest and skill in setting up classrooms, especially in terms of how the
physical environment, rules and procedures, and record keeping can support
new teachers. “I wish I’d had a program like this when I was a new teacher 23
years ago,” she said. Ms. Rogers developed an online module for new teachers
on physical environment, including photographs of classrooms all over the
district. “Th e induction support providers access these materials as well and
can make suggestions using these items while they’re meeting in the teacher’s
classroom,” she said. She explained that a goal of the district induction program
was to develop a complete set of online tools aligned to each of the factors in
the FIT Teaching Tool. At the Leading level for this criterion, Ms. Rogers was
using her experience to shape the practices of new teachers in her district.
2.1c: Community building
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
rarely creates
opportunities for
students to build
relationships
with one
another and
communicates
with families
only when there
is a problem.
The teacher occasionally
engages in relationship
building between and
among students or has
limited contact with families.
The teacher strengthens the
social fabric of the classroom
by building relationships
between and among
students and their families
in order to foster a positive
community of learners.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
strengthen the social fabric
of the classroom by building
relationships among
students and their families
in order to foster a positive
community of learners.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 54IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 54 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 55
Community drives each of us as humans. We look to our communities
to understand our identities, seek reaffi rmation, solve problems, and celebrate
achievements. Each classroom is a collection of individuals; the teacher builds
a sense of community by building relationships among its members. Th is
eff ort is deepened when the classroom community is nested within the larger
communities of school, family, and neighborhood. Block (2008) describes the
act of community building across three dimensions:
• Build the social fabric and transform the isolation within our
communities into connectedness and caring for the whole.
• Shift our conversations from the problems of community to the
possibility of community.
• Commit to create a future distinct from the past. (p. 177)
Many teachers, especially those at the elementary level, routinely schedule
class meetings, morning circles, and end-of-week gatherings to discuss the learn-
ing lives of the class members. Th ese events are marked with discussion about
recent and upcoming events, routines that allow children to know one another
better, and ways the group can address problems they are facing. However, these
meetings are far less common at the middle and high school levels, perhaps
because of time constraints and a higher number of students on the roster. A
damaging assumption that some teachers make, however, is that someone else
will take care of the community building. Unfortunately, that is rarely the case.
A growing number of elementary and secondary schools are using
elements of restorative practices to address the importance of classroom
community building. Although more readily associated with discipline issues
(discussed later in this chapter), the process rests on the proactive measures
teachers take to build a strong classroom community that can weather
problems that arise. Class meetings are times when the class addresses issues
faced by the students, which can include low-level problems, such as equitable
distribution of playground equipment at recess or how the art room is reset
near the end of the class period. Formal class meetings follow an agenda, such
as the one in Figure 2.1. Over time, the agenda is increasingly student-driven.
First-year teacher Shannon Potter studied the eff ects of implementing class
meetings three times per week for eight weeks in her 5th and 6th grade multi-
age classroom and reported “increased students’ skills in relation to listening
attentively, complimenting and appreciating others, showing respect for others,
and building a sense of community” (Potter & Davis, 2003, p. 88).
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 55IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 55 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

56 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Another approach for community building in the classroom is circles.
Th ese events are held with students either sitting in chairs or standing in a
circle. Students speak one at a time, holding a talking piece to signal their
intention to do so, and have an opportunity to pass if desired. Topics of circles
at the school where we work have addressed test anxiety, strategies for dealing
with diffi culties during collaborative learning, and processing emotions after
a visit to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. Th ese circles further build
relationships as students learn about shared and unique perspectives of others.
Teachers can use a number of ways to build community in the classroom;
meetings and circles are just two of them.
Community exists outside the classroom as well, and teachers play an
integral part in this outreach. Families are critical partners in the learning lives
of their children, but some don’t feel welcomed into the classroom or may be
reluctant or unable to come to the school because of work or transportation
issues. Th e National Network of Partnership Schools at Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity has studied successful family partnership practices (Epstein et al., 2009) and
recommends these six practices:
• Make the school a place where parents can learn skills to support their
children academically and emotionally (e.g., parent academies, literacy and
math nights).
• Provide regular communication to families about the classroom and
their own children (e.g., phone calls, personal letters, and newsletters).
• Extend volunteer opportunities in the classroom and remotely to
families who are interested and able.
• Create homework assignments that allow children to involve their
families (e.g., interviewing a family member about a historical event).
Figure 2.1 | Sample Meeting Agenda
I. Call the Meeting to Order
II. Encouragement Circle
III. Old Business
IV. New Business
V. Shout-Outs
VI. Close Meeting
Source: From Better Than Carrots or Sticks: Restorative Practices for Positive Classroom Management (p. 91), by D. Smith, D. Fisher, & N. Frey, 2015,
Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Copyright 2015 by ASCD.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 56IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 56 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 57
• Involve families in decision making (e.g., governance, classroom surveys).
• Invite community collaboration (e.g., coordination with other service
providers, community service projects).
Many of these practices have school and classroom implications. Although
some involve the entire school (e.g., literacy night), they can begin with a grade
level hosting an event. Some community service projects are quite large and
complex but can begin as a classroom eff ort, such as cleaning the school grounds.
In other words, we fi rmly believe that community building with families should
not be dismissed because there is no current school initiative to do so. It begins
with individual teachers who signal their understanding of the mutual benefi ts
derived from such eff orts.
Unfortunately, Donovan Bradshaw did not believe that it was his
responsibility to build community in his middle school social studies classroom.
As he said, “Look, I keep it safe in here, but I’m not all touchy-feely. I think that
students need to know how to behave and that there are consequences for when
they don’t.” When disputes arose in his classroom, Mr. Bradshaw sent students
to the offi ce to be dealt with. His principal, Marcia Layne, had visited his
classroom on several occasions and had engaged in a number of conversations
with Mr. Bradshaw about community building. She told him, “Donovan, you’re
a generally strong teacher. Last year when we met and reviewed the year and
your artifacts, we agreed that you consistently performed at the Teaching level,
which is totally fi ne. I asked about your desire to move to the Leading level, but
you didn’t seem interested in that. A major area that is still Not Yet Apparent in
your classroom is community building. I have never seen anything that allows
students in your class to feel connected with each other or with you. Th is year, as
I have visited, I have been asking students if they feel valued in your classroom,
and they generally don’t. Only 3 of the 27 students I’ve asked in the past few
weeks said ‘kinda’; all of the others said no. Is there anything that I can do to
help you build a stronger learning community?”
Mr. Bradshaw asked if he could have a couple of days to think about this
and get back to her. When he did, this is what he said: “Look, I’ve been burned
so many times. I got close to some students, and then they broke my heart. So
I guess that I keep my distance now. You’re the fi rst one to really call me out
on this. I’ve had a lot of administrators over the years, and you’re the fi rst to
really notice this and then off er help. I’m willing to give this a try, but only if you
understand that I may backslide a bit. I talked with my wife, and she reminded
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 57IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 57 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

58 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
me about when I became a teacher and my passion for the classroom. Where
do we start?”
In a neighboring school in the same district, a group of teachers redesigned
their community-building activities. As part of their commitment, they decided
to visit other classrooms to observe the community-building activities that
other teachers used. Kimberly Knox, a 6th grade teacher, was the fi rst to invite
others to her classroom. Her students had been working on providing help to
one another. Ms. Knox noted, “I think that helping other people is an important
way to build community, so I started teaching my students how to do this and
not just give away the answer.”
A large poster in Ms. Knox’s classroom included the following questions:
• Have you asked for help today when you needed it?
• Have you off ered help to another when you recognized the need for it?
• Did you accept help when it was off ered?
• If you wanted to continue to try on your own, did you politely
decline help?
When asked about this eff ort, Ms. Knox responded, “I remember back in my
credential program years ago being introduced to this idea in a book [Sapon-
Shevin, 1998]. I just thought I’d try it to see if it builds community, and I’m
amazed. My students don’t just tell each other the answer anymore. Th ey actu-
ally off er help and then talk about why the answer is correct. It’s been great for
building community between students and with me.”
Th e visitors watched Ms. Knox’s students work collaboratively. In one
group, they heard a student ask, “How did you know that was the right answer?”
Another replied, “Well, it’s because you have to remember that you reverse the
inequality symbol when you multiply by a negative number.” Th e fi rst student
then responded, “Oh, I forgot that. Th ank you for reminding me.”
In another group, Marco completed his problem set, looked around at the
other members of his group, and asked, “Does anyone need help? I’m fi nished,
and I think I understand it pretty well.” Fredley responded, “Maybe, but can you
give me a sec? I think I almost got it,” and Jacobson said, “I’ll take some help on
number 9. I think that you color in the circle on the number line because the
symbol is less than or equal to, but I could be wrong.” Marco said, “Does anyone
else want to jump in?” None of the others did, so Marco continued, “When
you shade, that means that the number is included. Let’s put the number in the
equation and see if this is right.”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 58IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 58 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 59
Following their visit, Ms. Knox off ered to provide the visitors with the
sentence frames she used to introduce the helping curriculum. She loaned one of
the visitors the book she had used and off ered to meet again after that person had
read the relevant chapter. She also off ered to visit their classrooms, saying, “Th is
isn’t the only way to build the learning community, and I’d like to see what you all
are trying in your classroom.” Ms. Knox was Leading on this indicator.
When she had a chance to visit the classroom of the 8th grade teacher
who had borrowed her book, she noted that the students were involved in a
class meeting. An agenda was posted on the board, and a student was leading
the discussion, which focused on the results of a recent test. Th e students were
deciding what to do about the fact that many of them had not done well on the
assessment. Samuel said, “Maybe we could learn from this and try again. But
is that fair to the people who did a good job already?” Kerri responded, “I was
one who didn’t do so hot, but I don’t think it’s fair because it would waste time
for people who really studied.” Maria added, “I agree with Kerri because it’s our
own fault, and Mr. Handler shouldn’t have to do more work.”
Mr. Handler remained quiet as his students discussed the situation.
Another student, Brad, spoke. “I got an A. But I know that everyone can get
an A. What if we took a day and did our own review so that Mr. Handler didn’t
have extra work? And then we could teach each other the information. Mr.
Handler could just check us, and then we could all try again and the best out of
two would be our grades.”
When Ms. Knox discussed this exchange with Mr. Handler, she noted the
students’ skill in communication and their trust in each other. She commented
that Mr. Handler was clearly at the Teaching level of growth. He disagreed,
saying, “I appreciate that, but this is new to me. I’ve only had about three formal
class meetings. I feel like I’m still at the Developing level and want to know more
ways to build community. I’m enjoying it because I like to see students take on
more responsibility.”
Th ey discussed this further and decided to visit another teacher at their
school, Susan Stramburg. Th ey asked if they could observe a lesson, and Ms.
Stramburg agreed reluctantly. When they entered the classroom, the students
were engaged in various learning tasks. Some were working on computers;
others were at desks in groups. Ms. Stramburg was meeting with a small
group of students. A poster on the wall identifi ed specifi c actions that groups
of students should engage in: attentive listening, appreciation/no put-downs,
mutual respect, and the right to pass.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 59IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 59 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

60 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
When talking with a group of students, Mr. Handler asked about the poster
and learned that the class worked in “Tribes,” a kind of learning community (see
tribes.com), and that students knew that they were part of a community that is
designed to be collaborative and supportive. One of the students commented,
“Ms. Stramburg makes sure that we know that we are all important in this class.
Everyone has something to off er.” Another student added, “When we meet our
goals, we celebrate as a whole class.”
As Mr. Handler and Ms. Knox noted, Ms. Stramburg was at the Teaching
level. When asked why she was reluctant to host visitors, Ms. Stramburg said,
“I have invested a lot in Tribes, but some people don’t value it, and I guess I
don’t want to be judged. I’m proud of the learning community I’ve built, and I’m
willing to share, but I don’t go out of my way to promote social and emotional
stuff because it can put other people off .”
In response, Ms. Knox said, “I would love to collaborate with you to
learn more about this. I have been sharing a lot of my experiences in building
community, and I learned a lot more today. I hope you’ll join our team. We’re
going to change our school, and we need you!”
Factor 2.2: Growth Producing
Students thrive in an atmosphere where learning is valued above all else. We
can’t imagine a school that wouldn’t agree with that statement, but it is much
more diffi cult to practice it consistently. Without intending to, students can
receive mixed and unintended messages from schools about learning. Here are
a few that might ring a bell:
• Th ere are “good kids” and “bad kids.”
• Th ere are “smart kids” and “dumb kids.”
• It’s better to be right the fi rst time than to learn from a mistake.
• Compliance is more important than competence.
• Grades are more important than learning.
• I have to look out for myself, because no one else will.
Th e diff erence between a school’s culture and its climate is this: the culture
rests on what we do and don’t do; the climate is how it feels. And unfortunately,
although teachers never set out to teach these ideas, many students leave at
the end of the day believing such statements are true. But if the climate is a
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 60IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 60 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 61
response to our actions, then we need to alter those actions in order to send
diff erent messages, such as
• School is a place to grow as a person and as a learner.
• School is a place where errors are celebrated.
• School is a place to take academic risks.
• My competence grows each day.
• My school values my learning.
• We take care of each other.
Th e factor of the FIT Teaching Tool that we call Growth Producing is directly
infl uenced by the attitudes and actions of the teacher. Th e fi rst ingredient is builds
agency and identity, meaning that deliberate actions are taken to help students
see how they are growing personally and academically. Most of all, it consists
of the many opportunities we are given to link students’ performance with their
eff orts. Th e second ingredient, encourages academic risk taking, contributes to
children’s growth by encouraging them to experiment, to try something new,
and to fail forward into new learning. Th e third ingredient in this factor is
repairs harm, which goes beyond traditional classroom management. When
we repair harm, we actively seek ways not only to reach resolution but also to
equip students with the tools they need to resolve disputes and use prosocial
responses that preserve the classroom community.
2.2a: Builds agency and identity
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
belittles, shames,
or humiliates
students or
uses sarcasm,
diminishing
student agency
and identity.
The teacher often uses
language that contributes
to students’ learned
helplessness and, more
rarely, builds resilience and
persistence.
The teacher frames language
so that students develop
a sense of resilience and
persistence in their learning
lives.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to frame language so that
students develop a sense of
resilience and persistence in
their learning lives.
Learning is underpinned by beliefs that learners hold about themselves in
relation to the demands of a task and their ability to act upon the task, especially
when such ability doesn’t come readily. Identity is the development of a unique
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 61IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 61 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

62 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
personality that is based on a person’s interaction with the environment and the
people in that environment. Johnston (2004) notes that “building an identity
means coming to see in ourselves the characteristics of particular categories
(and roles) of people and developing a sense of what it feels like to be that sort
of person and belong in certain social spaces” (p. 23). Consider the following
statements and how they contribute to the learner’s identity.
• “How are you thinking like a historian today?” Th is question invites
students to assume the role of a historian and think about what it means to
do this type of work. It carries a clearly communicated assumption that the
student knows how historians think and can assume this identity.
• “Your opening line reminds me of something that other authors do. As
a reader, I enjoy openings with a startling statement, and you really captured
that here.” Th is comment suggests to the adolescent writer that he has engaged
in writerly behaviors and that the reader enjoyed the approach. Th is builds the
writer’s identity, communicating that the writing was eff ective and that the
writer should continue in this vein.
• “Th ere are so many ways to solve this problem, and I see that you solved
it two diff erent ways. I know that mathematicians often solve problems several
diff erent ways to check their fi ndings. I’d bet it was fun to see it work out both
ways.” Th is commentary communicates that the student is thinking like a
mathematician and has solved the problem in ways that were eff ective. It also
helps the student develop an identity as a problem solver who enjoys working
through complex situations.
People with a strong sense of agency believe that their eff orts and
accomplishments are linked. As Johnston (2004) notes, some students
understand that “if they act, and act strategically, they can accomplish their
goals” (p. 29). Other students, those who do not have a strong sense of agency,
think that their eff orts will likely be ineff ective; if they do succeed, it’s probably
because they were lucky this time, and that luck won’t hold. In other words,
“To be an agent is to intentionally make things happen by one’s actions. . . . Th e
core features of agency enable people to play a part in their self-development,
adaptation, and self-renewal with changing times” (Bandura, 2001, p. 2).
Teachers can foster students’ agency through careful use of language that builds
“bridges between action and consequence” and helps students see their role in
the outcome (Johnston, 2004, p. 30). For example, here are two questions and a
statement that can do a lot to build a learner’s agency:
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 62IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 62 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 63
• “Why?” is probably one of the most eff ective ways for building agency,
because refl ecting on this question helps students understand the processes
and procedures they use to accomplish things. As Johnston (2004) points out,
“Asking why children do or say the things they do helps them develop the
consciousness and hence ownership of their choices” (p. 37).
• “What might you do next?” helps students plan actions that they
believe will result in success. When students learn to verbalize their plans,
they have concrete examples of their actions that were or were not eff ective.
Th is statement also communicates to students that the teacher believes that
the student knows what to do next. Th is is in contrast to situations in which
the teacher takes back responsibility and tells the student what to do next.
Agency is built when the teacher assumes competence and guides the student
to perform.
• “You did it, but tell me how. I’m particularly interested in eff orts that
were and were not helpful.” Th is statement communicates to students that they
were successful and that some of their eff orts were useful and others were not.
It gives students an opportunity to refl ect on their actions and to determine
which of those actions were useful and should be implemented again.
Th ese two constructs—identity and agency—are integral to teaching,
as adults are able to profoundly infl uence both of them as students grow and
develop. Th e language that teachers use in their interactions with students
can build or stunt. We want to teach our students to persevere and to rise to
challenges rather than avoid them. But we also need to teach them resilience,
especially how to dust themselves off when they fail so that they can try again. A
child who is not resilient will be easily defeated and give up too early. Persistence
and resilience are positively correlated with one another and are predictive of
school enjoyment, class participation, and self-esteem (Martin & Marsh, 2006).
Identity and agency factor into problematic behaviors as well. Individuals
who lack agency are more likely to be angry and immobilized, to blame others,
and even to lash out. Contrast these two exchanges. Guess which one would
provoke an angry response from the student.
Scenario #1. Teacher: “What you just said to her was wrong. You need
to apologize.”
Scenario #2. Teacher: “What you just said to her was hurtful. You’re
better than that. Do you think you need to apologize? How can I help?”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 63IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 63 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

64 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th e fi rst scenario might provoke an angry exchange with the teacher, and,
more important, divert attention from the real problem, which is the relationship
with a peer. Th e second exchange actually happened after Nancy overheard a
comment a 10th grade student uttered about a female classmate. She spoke
quietly to the male student, putting her hand on his shoulder, and uttered those
four sentences. Th e boy spoke to the girl after class and apologized to her. Th e
interjection of those two sentences made a diff erence. When you say, “You’re
better than that,” you build the student’s identity at a time when he is less than
his best. Th at statement reminds him that his lapse in behavior doesn’t represent
who he wants to be. Th e question “How can I help?” reaffi rms his agency and
his ability to repair a relationship, even with help from another.
Statements that contribute to students’ sense of identity help them tell
stories about themselves and to themselves. We might call a talented writer
a poet to remind her how much her words mean or tell another student that
his kindness toward another classmate is an indicator of his empathy toward
others. But is this done routinely and for all students? We don’t mean teachers
ought to build a false and infl ated sense of self-esteem in every child—that
approach encourages arrogant and self-centered young people. But teachers
should be diligent in calling out those times when students exemplify the traits
we want them to develop further. Th ese “identify statements” should allow
students to see how their actions played a role in the accomplishment. When
we say, “I’ll bet you’re proud of yourself. Th is was a tough problem to solve.
Can you tell me how you did it?” we signal the accomplishment (solving the
problem) and link it to students’ actions (asking how they did it). Th rough brief
but frequent exchanges such as this, we build their identity (“I am a problem
solver”) and agency (“I did it by trying diff erent strategies until I found one
that worked”).
When a teacher uses sarcasm with students, agency and identity are
stunted. In fact, we believe that sarcasm should not be used when there are
power diff erentials, as is the case in the classroom. In addition, the vast majority
of children and youth do not understand the sophisticated humor that may be
part of sarcasm; they just think that some of their teachers are mean. When
a teacher uses sarcasm, the ingredient of building agency and identity is Not
Yet Apparent. In addition, when teachers belittle, humiliate, shame, dishonor,
demean, or chastise a student, this ingredient is Not Yet Apparent. Th at’s not to
say that the teacher has to be a pushover.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 64IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 64 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 65
Max Doyle was at the Developing level in terms of building agency and
identity with his students. As he says, “I’m not always sure what to do, so a lot of
times, I don’t say anything.” When being observed by colleagues or his principal,
Mr. Doyle was kind and supportive, but he did not seize the opportunity to
build students’ agency and identity. For example, during an observation of his
small-group, needs-based instruction, Mr. Doyle said, “Well done. Th at’s what
good mathematicians do to solve problems.” Th is statement won’t cause harm
to students, but a student who did not do what Mr. Doyle just reinforced might
think she is a bad mathematician. Another time, Mr. Doyle said, “I see confl ict
here in the group. I need you to work this out so that you can get back to work.”
In this case, Mr. Doyle noticed the problem rather than asking students to
identify what was wrong. He also expected students to comply so that they could
get back to work. What if they didn’t want to work? And could some students
comply with his request simply because he said he needed them to do so?
Again, this kind of practice is not causing harm, but it misses opportunities
to facilitate student growth. It would help if he rephrased his last comment to
something like this: “Is there something wrong in the group? Can you name
your feelings or experience? How does that feel? How would you like to work?”
With this kind of guidance, students are encouraged to refl ect on their actions
and interactions, slowly growing and developing into collaborative learners.
Heidi Miller had engaged in a lot of professional learning about the lan-
guage that teachers use to build students’ sense of self. She had read Th e Power
of Our Words (Denton, 2007) and had specifi cally requested coaching on her
ability to engage students in growth-producing interactions. For example, she
asked students a lot of open-ended questions as well as questions that allowed
them to refl ect on what their classmates said, including whether or not they
agreed. One day, while walking around the classroom as her students engaged
in a reciprocal teaching event (see Palincsar & Brown, 1984), she leaned over
to Justin and said, “I see you wrote the main ideas down in your own words.
How do you think that will help you when you share with your peers?” In
another group, Ms. Miller smiled at Carmen and said, “Your questions sound
a lot like a reporter’s. Tell me about the kinds of answers you are getting in
return.” Ms. Miller’s focus on agency and identity resulted in her attaining a
Teaching level of growth.
Special educator Charles Shaginaw provided regular feedback and
coaching on agency and identity for the general educators on his grade-level
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 65IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 65 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

66 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
team. He noted, “I think it’s my job to make sure that students are feeling good
about themselves as they learn. I have direct responsibility for students with
disabilities, but I like to think that I have indirect responsibilities for all students,
and my contributions are about the language we use with them to help them
grow.” Mr. Shaginaw had the interpersonal skills and positive relationships with
teachers to talk with them in an authentic, nonthreatening way about how they
used language in their classrooms.
For example, he observed a teacher comment to a student during class,
“Now why would you want to do that?” After class, Mr. Shaginaw asked the
teacher about that comment, noting that it could have been interpreted as
sarcastic. As part of their conversation, Mr. Shaginaw said, “You know I’m
not the keeper of this, right? I just have the chance to hear things from our
kids’ perspective.”
Th e teacher responded, “Yeah, no—I like when you have time to visit and
ask me about these things. It makes me better, and it helps students learn. I
hope that Brian didn’t think I was being sarcastic. I wanted him to process
through his thinking, so I was asking about the next step. But I see that it could
seem like I wasn’t being as respectful as I could have been. How could I say it?”
Mr. Shaginaw responded, “Let’s see. Again, I’m no expert, but I was thinking
that you might want to say something like, ‘I think I see where you’re going,
but it might help us all if you could explain your process a bit more.’” Th ese two
continued their conversation about language as Mr. Shaginaw demonstrated his
Leading level of growth.
2.2b: Encourages academic risk taking
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not encourage
risk taking and
potential failure,
instead valuing
student comfort
and contentment
over challenge.
The teacher values accuracy
over potential growth and
only occasionally challenges
students to extend their
thinking, even if it means
initial failure.
The teacher fosters a growth
mindset for students
by creating a safe and
respectful environment
where failure is not ridiculed
but considered an important
component of the learning
process.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
foster a growth mindset for
students by creating a safe
and respectful environment
where failure is not ridiculed
but considered an important
component of the learning
process.
Carol Dweck (2006) has written extensively about the role of a growth
mindset in learner success. People with a growth mindset presume that it’s
eff ort, instruction, and persistence—not innate traits, such as intelligence and
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 66IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 66 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 67
heredity—that alter one’s abilities. More important, well-meaning praise, when
off ered for the wrong reason, can actually decrease motivation, as when a child’s
intelligence is the focus. “You’re so smart,” we say, and the child’s motivation
to expend eff ort decreases just a bit. After several years of marinating in this
sauce, students begin to encounter more academic challenges, but they haven’t
appreciated the eff ort that others expend. Many students begin to choose less-
demanding coursework because they fear failure and are not entirely sure they
are willing to put forth eff ort.
We had a spirit week not too long ago at the middle school where two of us
work, and one day’s theme was “Dress to Impress.” Th ere was a dance scheduled
for the afternoon, and many students came to school dressed in suits, ties, and
dresses. We chose to wear our doctoral garb, telling students, “It’s not what you
have. It’s what you do.” Th at’s the message we want to send students every day.
When we share our accomplishments—and make sure that we don’t leave out
the parts of our stories when things got more diffi cult—we help students to see
that academic risk taking is part of the learning process.
In the classroom, academic risk taking means that grades are earned
through competence, not compliance. To put it diff erently, students have an
opportunity to try again when they don’t do well the fi rst time on a homework
assignment, a project, or a test. Importantly, these same students are not
penalized for their practice in getting the learning down, which means they’re
not penalized with point deductions for not being academically successful on
the fi rst attempt (Fisher, Frey, & Pumpian, 2011). Dweck (2006) reminds us that
challenge lies at the heart of learning:
Speed and perfection are the enemy of diffi cult learning: “If you think
I’m smart when I’m fast and perfect, I better not take on anything
challenging.” So what should we say when children complete a task—say,
math problems—quickly and perfectly? Should we deny them the praise
they have earned? Yes. When this happens, I say, “Whoops. I guess that
was too easy. I apologize for wasting your time. Let’s do something you
can really learn from!” (p. 179)
Fifth grade teacher Monica Ritter and her fellow team members were
discussing students who were not making progress. In response to a suggestion
from another teacher, Alicia Olivera, Ms. Ritter said, “I really don’t know if
that will work to close the gap, but I think it’s worth a try.” Ms. Olivera had
developed a rather elaborate intervention schedule that included scheduled
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 67IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 67 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

68 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
times when the academic coach could oversee the classroom for a few minutes
while the teacher engaged in a private conversation with students who
continued to struggle. Ms. Olivera said, “I’ve been thinking about this a lot and
have piloted this in my classroom. I’m now confi dent enough to share. I think
a lot of our students have acquired learned helplessness, and our interventions
are not getting through because they do not see themselves working hard and
then being successful. So I asked Beth [the academic coach] to come into the
class and essentially supervise while the students worked independently or
collaboratively. During those times, I met with Brandee and Chad individually.
It wasn’t the intervention time, so I wasn’t focused on their skills. I just had a chat
with them about their eff orts and what I saw paying off . It’s been amazing, and
I was hoping that we could try this as a grade level. I have developed a schedule
that I think can work. And I’ll do all of the work in writing out these statements
to build students’ growth mindset. I have to admit that I wasn’t really into this
part of the growth tool until I saw Monica teach. She always encourages risk
taking, so I thought to myself, I can too.” Alicia Olivera had moved into the
Leading level, while Monica Ritter was at the Teaching level.
A visit to Ms. Ritter’s classroom clearly confi rmed her comfort with
encouraging her students to take risks. Th e students even talked this way to
their peers, having heard their teacher model this for them over the course of
the school year. On one particular visit, Ms. Ritter was interacting with a small
group of students who had completed their assigned task. Joining their group,
she said, “You’ve been focused on this for several minutes, and I see that you
have completed the task. But I’m wondering something. How could you change
this to make it more complex for each other? Could you rewrite the problems
and questions and then trade papers? Go ahead. Take a risk and see what else
you can learn.”
First grade teacher Jesse Hernandez was performing at the Developing level.
He provided students with a lot of praise, but it was not specifi c, and students
were not routinely encouraged to try things that would stretch their abilities.
Nevertheless, Mr. Hernandez did focus on each student’s individual eff orts
and had regular individual conferences to talk with children about their work
habits. For example, Mr. Hernandez met with Andrew to review his writing,
asking him to describe how he decided what to write. Andrew responded, “I
just know what I wanna write.” Mr. Hernandez said, “I bet you do, but can you
tell me how you think about it when you write? I’m interested in how you work
to get things done.”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 68IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 68 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 69
Andrew thought about this for several seconds and then said, “It just pops
in my head. But sometimes it goes away again. I make it into a picture so that I
can remember. And then I write about the picture. Do you think that’s good, to
make pictures to remember?” In response, Mr. Hernandez said, “Yes, as long as
it works for you and helps you keep focused on your writing.”
Th is approach diff ered from that of Janelle Black, who was at the Not Yet
Apparent level of growth. She avoided risk taking herself and regularly told her
peers, “I want my students to be successful. In fact, I plan for them to succeed
on their work. I hate seeing them struggle. I don’t see any reason to harass a
1st grader. Th eir day should be fun and easy.” It would likely take a number
of conversations with her peers, and perhaps even her administrator, for Ms.
Black to reconsider the value of risk taking in the classroom.
2.2c: Repairs harm
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not address
disruptions and
misbehavior or
routinely has
others outside
the classroom
address behavior
issues.
The teacher’s responses to
disruptions and misbehavior
are primarily respectful but
reactive, and the return to
productive learning is often
delayed.
The teacher expects,
plans for, and responds to
disruptions or misbehavior
in a manner that respects
students and focuses on
a return to productive
learning.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to expect, plan for, and
respond to disruptions or
misbehavior in a manner
that respects students
and focuses on a return to
productive learning.
Earlier in this chapter we discussed restorative practices. In the section
on ingredient 2.1c, we described the importance of community building in the
classroom, especially through techniques such as class meetings and informal
circles. Th ese peace-building eff orts form a foundation for the group to stand
on when problems arise. Ingredient 2.2c describes the peacemaking eff orts to
repair harm when it occurs. Th e teacher typically facilitates these discussions
so that aff ected students not only resolve the problem at hand but also leave
the exchange more skilled in responding to problems in preparation for the
next time.
Any number of incidents might occur to cause harm: a teacher has money
stolen from her purse; two former friends are threatening one another; a student
has sold copies of an exam; a teacher humiliates a student in front of others. Th e
conventional response for the fi rst three incidents is to identify the perpetrators
and dole out suspensions. In the last case, unfortunately, reparations are unlikely.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 69IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 69 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

70 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Bullying is another form of harm. Despite heightened attention to the
problem, children routinely report that their teachers are either unaware of
bullying that is going on or unwilling to intervene in many instances of bullying
(e.g., Veenstra, Lindenberg, Huitsing, Sainio, & Salmivalli, 2014). Although
physical aggressions are usually met with swift action, more subtle relational
problems, whether in face-to-face interactions or in cyberspace, often go
unaddressed. Children use unkind actions and words against one another,
and an unkind act is not necessarily bullying. Bullying involves a diff erential
distribution of power, which can manifest itself in a number of ways (size, ability,
number, or social capital). But it also involves others, not just the victim and
the aggressor. Bystanders, friends of those directly involved, and the classroom
community are all involved (Olweus, 2003). Whether the harm that is done
is through unkind interactions or because of bullying, eff ective teachers know
how to notice and respond to these incidences.
Regardless of the type of harm done, teachers need to work to repair the
harm so that learning can continue to occur. We use the principles of restorative
practices outlined by Costello, Wachtel, and Wachtel (2009):
• Try to foster understanding of the impact of the behavior
• Seek to repair the harm that was done to people and relationships
• Attend to the needs of victims and others in the school
• Avoid imposing on students intentional pain, embarrassment and
discomfort
• Actively involve others as much as possible. (p. 52)
Of course, there are many other ways, both formal and informal, to address
and repair harm. Tribes, a formal program, was cited earlier in the chapter.
Various character education programs feature the language and practices of
expressing remorse, accepting apologies, and restoring relationships. Th e
common thread in all of these approaches is that the teacher notices when the
social fabric of the classroom has been disrupted and takes steps to repair the
harm and restore the learning environment.
Fourth grade teacher Amanda Payne used a peace table in her classroom
to ensure that her students had a physical place to resolve confl icts and repair
harm. Th e peace table, inspired by Montessori educational approaches, always
had a timer and a “peace item” sitting on it; there were two chairs at the table as
well. Ms. Payne used a sand timer, and a jewelry box contained the peace item,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 70IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 70 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 71
a small rock shaped like a heart. She let the students know that her husband
gave her the heart-shaped rock so that she would always know she was loved
and could love others.
Ms. Payne talked about the challenges of establishing the peace table at the
beginning of each year: “Every year, it seems like a lot of work. I have to mediate
a lot of the conversations at the table, providing students with language frames
and support to repair the harm that is done. But then an event occurs and a
student will ask to meet with another student at the table, and I won’t have to
off er any support. It’s magical, and it happens every year.”
On one visit to her classroom, Principal Leigh Corbin observed Mark ask
Zach to meet at the peace table. Mark turned the timer over, signaling that
they both should remain quiet for two minutes while the sand ran through the
hourglass. When the time was up, Mark held the rock and said, “I didn’t like it
when you took my stuff .”
Zach responded, “What stuff ? When did I take something of yours?”
“Yeah. You took the book I was reading, and then last week you took my
fi dget toy.”
“I didn’t know they were yours. You shoulda told me. I’m sorry. Do you
want the book to read? I could get a diff erent one.”
“My feelings were hurt, but I guess that I don’t need that book. You can
read it and then give it to me after, OK?”
Th is conversation may not seem like much, but it established a habit for
students to identify when they had been hurt and needed to have the harm
repaired. Th is interaction was over a fairly minor situation, but the habit that
Ms. Payne was developing in her students would allow them to address much
bigger issues when they arose.
When asked about more signifi cant issues and events, Ms. Payne related
a story about two students who got into a fi ght at recess. Th ey could not even
remember why they got into the fi ght, but clearly harm had been done and
feelings were hurt. At that point, neither of the students was ready to learn. Ms.
Payne said, “I talked with Ms. Corbin, and we decided to notify the parents but
not send [the students] home. We decided to let them try to work it out at the
peace table and see what happened. If they couldn’t do that, then we’d have to
do something more formal. Of course, I was right near the table, just in case,
observing and every once in a while interjecting. Th ey did such a good job. It
made me really proud that these students could repair the harm that was done,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 71IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 71 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

72 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
take ownership, and understand that they hurt another person. And you know
what? Th ey have never done this again.” On this ingredient, Ms. Payne was
performing at the Teaching level.
Ms. Payne’s approach diff ered signifi cantly from the actions taken by
Elizabeth Lewis, who sent students to the offi ce each time there was an infraction.
She said, “It’s really not my responsibility to fi gure out the discipline. I’m here
to teach, and I appreciate the support from my admin, who talks with students
about their behavior and how to correct it.” On the ingredient of repairs harm,
Ms. Lewis is Not Yet Apparent. Interestingly in this case, the administrators
are enabling her and actually preventing her from assuming responsibility
for repairing harm. Of course, some situations are beyond teachers’ control,
and counselors and school leaders should be involved in supporting teachers
and classrooms. Having said that, we believe that teachers should have a role
in creating and maintaining the learning community, and doing so requires
addressing harm when it occurs.
High school biology teacher Madison Henry had experienced a great
deal of success in developing relationships with students and holding them
accountable for their academics, attendance, and citizenship. When harm was
done, she met with students to ensure that it was repaired. Ms. Henry worked at
a school with a fairly traditional discipline policy in terms of referrals, in-school
suspensions, out-of-school suspensions, and expulsions. However, as she noted,
there was still a need to repair the harm done when students returned to class.
Ms. Henry was so eff ective at this that the school social worker asked her
to support other members of the science department as they worked to improve
in this area. Ms. Henry provided her colleagues with examples of the questions
she used in diff erent situations. As she explained, “I have diff erent scripts based
on what happened, so that I can follow the same line of questions. Th ese have
really helped me more quickly and effi ciently repair harm and reestablish
relationships.” Sample questions from Ms. Henry appear in Figure 2.2.
Ms. Henry captured on video several interactions she had with students
and shared the clips with her colleagues, saying, “I hope you can give me
feedback about which questions worked and which you think fell fl at.” Together,
they viewed the clips and discussed what they saw.
Michael Davies said, “Th is is all fairly new to me. I try to do this, but
I’m not sure that I’m very eff ective—yet. But what I noticed in the clips is
that you have conversations with students who are doing really well, both
academically and behaviorally. I hadn’t thought about that, but I bet it makes
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 72IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 72 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 73
the conversations easier when there is something that goes wrong.” Mr. Davies
was at the Developing level of growth and was clearly interested in growing in
this area. Ms. Henry was at the Leading level on this indicator, yet she was still
questioning the most eff ective ways to meet student needs.
Factor 2.3: Effi cient
A lack of organizational skills that keep the learners moving forward without
excessive disruptions can undermine an otherwise eff ective teacher. Although
such skills may not be obvious in an effi cient classroom, their absence is certainly
noticeable in classrooms without them or in those where the teacher struggles
to prioritize. Often referred to as classroom management, these practices
contribute to the learning momentum. Well-paced and effi cient managers do
the following:
• Establish rules for how the class functions.
• Have routines and procedures in place for tasks.
• Smoothly transition students from one task to another.
• Use time wisely to maximize instruction.
• Maintain necessary records such that colleagues, families, and students
are kept apprised of learning.
In this third factor of Cultivating a Learning Climate, we further discuss the
teaching behaviors that align to these practices. Th e fi rst ingredient describes
qualities of rules, routines, and procedures that ensure the classroom runs
Figure 2.2 | Sample Prompts for Repairing Harm and
Reestablishing Relationships
For meetings with individual students who are
struggling behaviorally or academically:
• How do you describe yourself?
• How do other people describe you?
• What assumptions do teachers make about you that
are not true?
• How would you like others to describe you?
• Let’s make a plan to get you where you want
to be. . . .
For meetings with individual students who are
doing well:
• How do you describe yourself?
• What assumptions do teachers make about you that
are not true?
• What are we doing that is helping you reach your
goals?
• What should we be doing more or less of to help
you reach your goals?
• Let’s make a plan to get you where you want
to be. . . .
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 73IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 73 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

74 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
effi ciently. Th e second ingredient, record keeping, allows teachers to organize
data that benefi t students and other stakeholders.
2.3a: Rules, routines, and procedures
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not establish
rules, routines,
and procedures,
resulting in
a confusing
learning
environment.
The teacher establishes
some rules, routines, and
procedures, but they are
used inconsistently or do
not anticipate common
situations, resulting
in needless learning
interruptions.
The teacher proactively
establishes and maintains
rules, routines, and
procedures that enable
students to self-regulate,
resulting in smooth
classroom operations that
maximize learning.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to proactively establish and
maintain rules, routines,
and procedures that enable
students to self-regulate,
resulting in smooth
classroom operations that
maximize learning.
Cultivating a learning climate requires strong, positive student-teacher
relationships and a focus on fostering the growth of the whole child. Th ese
factors should be aligned with the rules, routines, and procedures that make
communication and collaboration possible. We defi ne these elements as follows:
• Rules comprise a set of expectations that govern the ways people
work together.
• Routines describe the daily or weekly systems that govern the
learning day.
• Procedures are aligned to the spirit of the rules and put the routines
into operation.
Most classroom management researchers recommend that there be three
to fi ve positively stated rules and that they be posted and revisited regularly
(Good & Brophy, 2007). Some educators, especially those working with younger
children, make the rules concrete and specifi c (e.g., “Keep hands and feet quiet,”
“Raise your hand before speaking,” etc.). Secondary educators tend to design
broader rules that convey a set of classroom values (e.g., “Take care of yourself,
each other, and this place”). Whether broad or specifi c, the rules are usually an
amalgam of classroom etiquette and values in support of a group’s prosocial
development. Some educators codevelop rules with their students, whereas
others present them as fully formed and complete. Valid arguments support
both methods.
Routines are used regularly and provide structure to the learner’s day. For
instance, primary educators often begin the day with an extended calendar
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 74IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 74 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 75
routine, hold a classroom circle on the carpet just after lunch, and end the week
with a class meeting. Middle and high school educators have a much shorter
time with students each day but rely on their own routines, such as posting
bell work on the board for students to complete in the fi rst minutes of class or
giving short, low-stakes quizzes so that students can measure their learning
progress. Like all humans, our students rely on routines that allow them to
develop a sense of the fl ow of the day or the class period. We aren’t suggesting
for a moment that each day should look exactly the same as the previous or
the next. However, a lack of expected routines can have a destabilizing eff ect
on learners (Good & Brophy, 2007). As with rules, the details of these routines
should be taught and revisited, especially after school breaks.
Procedures, the third facet of this ingredient, are used to teach students
how the classroom community works together. Th e best procedures anticipate
common situations, such as these:
• Sharpening pencils or locating a writing instrument
• Checking laptops and tablets out of the classroom recharging cart
• Using the restroom
• Marking attendance
• Storing belongings and materials
• Lining up for recess, lunch, and dismissal
• Turning in papers and digital assignments
Th is list could be much longer, but we hope you get the idea: procedures teach
students how to make decisions without consulting the teacher each time. In
other words, procedures should build students’ independence and provide
them with structures to self-regulate rather than relying on others to make
these decisions.
A team of 10th grade teachers representing all subject matters met to
examine the rules, routines, and procedures used in their classrooms. Th ey
chose to do so because they had noticed quite a bit of unevenness regarding
student performance across the day. Students who were reported by some to be
reliable in one class were described as being disruptive in others. Th e teachers
speculated that their expectations varied widely and that students responded
diff erently to each context.
Th e team fi rst toured each other’s classrooms to determine what visual
markers people were using to guide student decisions. Only three of the seven
classrooms had rules posted, and despite many similarities, there were some
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 75IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 75 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

76 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
variances. Joel Mullins, a geography teacher, explained that he didn’t post the
rules because “students should know by now how to act. Th ey’re 15.” Two
others said that their rules were written on the syllabus they distributed at the
beginning of the year. “How do students who enroll later in the year know the
rules?” asked Travis Hardy, the geometry teacher. “Some of the students we
identifi ed as having problems in some classes came after the school year began.
I keep my rules posted in a prominent place and revisit them each quarter.
When I get new students, I supply a welcome packet for them that includes the
rules and procedures and review the material with them.”
Th e 10th grade team reconvened, this time to chart the routines they used.
Again, despite many similarities, the specifi c procedures varied widely, especially
in the use of personal technology and leaving class to visit the restroom. Mr.
Mullins let students use the restroom at any time, regardless of how many
students were gone, resulting in many of his students roaming the halls at any
given time. English teacher Samantha Reynolds kept a small whiteboard next
to the door for students to log their names, and she limited restroom visits to
one boy and one girl at any time. Th is procedure sparked minor confl ict in her
classroom, as students complained and pointed out that “Mr. Mullins doesn’t
care when we go.”
Use of personal technology always seemed to be a struggle, but the entire
team liked the approach that geometry teacher Travis Hardy used. He made
a poster using an old smartphone case and a set of earbuds, with the words
Plugged In and Unplugged. Mr. Hardy plugged and unplugged the earbuds
throughout the class to signal when it was OK to listen to music (e.g., inde-
pendent learning time) and when everyone should be unplugged (e.g., during
focused instruction, guided instruction, and collaborative learning). “It’s really
worked for me this year, and it’s helped me be more consistent in my message
to the kids on this subject,” he said.
Th e 10th grade team agreed that the use of consistent procedures would
help all of them, especially by reducing incongruent or confl icting procedures
that caused disruptions. Mr. Mullins, at the Not Yet Apparent growth level for
this ingredient, admitted that his laissez-faire approach contributed to ongoing
behavior problems in his class. On the other hand, Mr. Hardy, at the Teaching
growth level, had far fewer interruptions to his instruction. Ms. Reynolds, at the
Developing level, used a generally eff ective procedure for students requesting to
use the restroom but also struggled with behavior. She decided to post her rules
and design a welcome packet like Mr. Hardy’s.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 76IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 76 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 77
Several months later, as the end of the school year approached, the team
asked Mr. Hardy to coordinate an eff ort to formalize rules and procedures so
that the entire grade level would hold consistent expectations for next year’s
students. Over the summer, Mr. Hardy wrote a short insert that the team
could use in their syllabi that explained the rules, routines, and procedures.
Mr. Hardy’s eff orts demonstrated his transition from the Teaching level to the
Leading level for this ingredient.
2.3b: Record keeping
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher’s
instructional and
noninstructional
records are
consistently
incomplete,
delayed, not
secured, or
missing.
The teacher maintains
instructional and
noninstructional records,
but these are sometimes
delayed or incomplete,
making them less useful
to students, families, and
colleagues.
The teacher maintains
both instructional and
noninstructional records so
that data are immediately
available for planning and
to inform students, families,
and colleagues.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
maintain both instructional
and noninstructional records
so that data are immediately
available for planning and
to inform students, families,
and colleagues.
We identifi ed record keeping as an ingredient in the Cultivating a Learning
Climate component because it aff ects so many other aspects of the FIT
Teaching Tool. Specifi cally, the ability to organize student information, handle
papers, grade and return student work, and communicate student progress to
colleagues and families is necessary to do the following:
• Identify transfer goals (1.1a)
• Identify success criteria (1.2a)
• Plan for diff erentiation (1.3b)
• Organize the physical environment (2.1b)
• Scaff old support (3.2b)
• Provide diff erentiated language support (3.3c)
• Check for understanding (4.2a)
• Analyze errors (4.2b)
• Deliver needs-based instruction (4.3c)
• Monitor student progress in both the short and long term (5.1 and 5.2)
Although information management is critical, it rarely receives much
attention until it is a problem. Anyone who has spent time in meetings between
educators and family members can attest to the genuine frustration that occurs
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 77IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 77 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

78 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
when multiple students claim that a particular teacher routinely loses their
work and then gives them failing grades. Parents rightly protest when they are
contacted late in the year about their child’s academic struggles, when little
previous information has been relayed. “If this is a problem, why didn’t I know
about it sooner?” they ask, and they’re right. A third circumstance, one not
readily apparent, is when a child fails to make progress. How often do we dig
deeper to fi nd out if the student has had the formative assessment experiences,
scaff olded supports, and needs-based instruction she really requires? A fi nal
example of the deleterious eff ects of poor record keeping involves communi-
cation with colleagues.
Student study teams and professional learning communities operate on the
basis of current information about student performance. Th e data management
clerk needs grades to be submitted on time in order to run report cards. Special
educators require up-to-date information about student progress in order to
develop meaningful statements on present levels of performance and annual
goals for individualized education programs. Th e district’s administrator of
the student information system needs electronic records to be stored securely
so that student privacy is not compromised. And let’s not forget about
students whose teachers use digital grade books so that students can assume
responsibility for checking their own progress. If work is not promptly graded,
returned, and recorded, the information is far less useful. Many a student can
attest to parental displeasure when viewing the electronic grade book and
fi nding “missing” assignments that were submitted on time but not recorded
by the teacher.
Marcus Woo had found himself overwhelmed by record keeping
problems before. Th e previous year, at his summative evaluation, he received
a Not Yet Apparent designation for this ingredient. A veteran teacher with
more than 30 years of experience, Mr. Woo had resisted using the district’s
learning management system (LMS), which included an electronic grade book
that students and parents could access. Instead, he continued using the same
paper grade book he had used for decades. Th e inability to retrieve grading
information had negatively aff ected the special education support provider
who worked with several children in Mr. Woo’s 5th grade classroom. Because
Mr. Woo didn’t use the district’s system, she was unable to retrieve information
about students’ progress, which compromised her ability to eff ectively complete
her job responsibilities.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 78IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 78 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Cultivating a Learning Climate | 79
Based on this review, Mr. Woo attended two district-sponsored workshops
during the summer to overcome his reluctance and build his skills. He met with
a 5th grade teacher during planning week to set up his grade book. Hilary Estes
had served on the district’s technology committee to evaluate several LMSs
two years earlier, and she received additional training on the implementation
of the tool. During the fi rst quarter, Ms. Estes met with Mr. Woo at lunch every
Wednesday to look at his grade book. Initially, he needed some assistance
inputting grades, but he soon got the hang of it with Ms. Estes there to guide
him. As the end of the fi rst quarter approached, he had new questions about
weighting assignments and reporting progress on annual goals for his students
with disabilities. Ms. Estes’s work with her colleague was evidence of her
Leading growth level on this criterion, while Mr. Woo had progressed to the
Developing growth level.
As Idrina Duque, another member of the same 5th grade team, prepared
for a summative meeting using the FIT Teaching Tool, she assembled artifacts
for the Cultivating a Learning Climate component. Th e evidence she brought
for the record keeping ingredient included the binder she kept for logging her
anecdotal notes as well as her telephone log of calls made to families to report
student progress. Ms. Duque noted that she had phoned each family at least
twice during the fi rst nine weeks of school. Th ese short conversations included
a welcome, a positive story about their child, and a discussion of the child’s
academic progress. She and the administrator agreed that she was performing
at the Teaching growth level at this time.
Summing Up
We have a positive presupposition when it comes to students. We believe that
students want to develop healthy relationships with their teachers and expect
to be treated with respect and fairness. Further, we think that students respond
best when the rules, procedures, and expectations are clear and are implemented
consistently. Unfortunately, clear and consistent expectations are not always the
case, which is why the same student behaves (and learns) diff erently with and
from diff erent adults.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 79IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 79 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

80 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th e learning climate takes time and investment to nurture and can be
easily disrupted throughout the year. For this reason alone, it is worth regularly
checking in with students, family members, and colleagues. Adjustments to
the climate can be made at any time. If students aren’t following the rules and
procedures set for them, then they need to be taught again. If students feel
disrespected, the rules and procedures will likely not matter to them. Data about
this component can be obtained through self-assessments and grade-level
discussions, as well as meetings with instructional coaches and administrators.
Th e climate of the classroom is fragile, and adjustments to procedures and the
physical environment can transform the classroom and give it new energy.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 80IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 80 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

81
3
Instructing with Intention
A teacher must possess two kinds of knowledge: content knowledge and
instructional, or pedagogical, knowledge. Shulman (1987) calls this essential
combination “pedagogical content knowledge” (PCK). In the words of Gess-
Newsome (2013), PCK is “a unique knowledge base held by teachers that
allows them to consider the structure and importance of an instructional topic,
recognize the features that will make it more or less accessible to students, and
justify the selection of teaching practices based on learning needs” (p. 257).
For more than a decade, much of our work has centered on the enactment
of pedagogical content knowledge through quality instruction (Fisher &
Frey, 2014a). We describe our instructional model as a gradual release of
responsibility, implemented in four phases. Critically, implementing this model
requires the teacher to understand not only the tools of teaching (pedagogy) but
also how to make the content understandable to others who do not possess the
same level of knowledge (content). Taken together, these instructional moves
systematically advance student learning by gradually shifting the cognitive and
metacognitive responsibility from teacher to students (see Figure 3.1). Here are
the four phases of our instructional model:
• Focused instruction, during which the teacher establishes the learning
intention and uses modeling and demonstrating to show how skills and
concepts are utilized.
• Guided instruction, during which the teacher uses questions, prompts,
and cues to scaff old student learning. Th is requires careful noticing of student
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 81IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 81 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

82 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
need and monitoring when they are integrating new knowledge, versus when
they need more overt support.
• Collaborative learning, during which students work with peers to take
on suffi ciently complex tasks in order to consolidate understanding.
• Independent learning, during which students practice and apply what
they have learned, now equipped with the cognitive resources they need to
engage in self-directed tasks.
Th e fi rst three of the four phrases of the gradual release of responsibility
model make up the Instructing with Intention component, and the fourth,
independent learning, is planned for in identifying success criteria (1.2a) and
is evidenced in Assessing with a System (the topic of Chapter 4). Success in
implementing a gradual release instructional framework requires knowledge
not only of the content but also of the anticipated learning progression that
will be necessary for students to learn the content. Skilled teachers are able to
match these instructional moves to the learning progression.
In this chapter, we turn our attention to Instructing with Intention. Th e
instructional moves outlined capture the actions of teachers who are applying
Figure 3.1 | Essential Components of the Gradual Release
of Responsibility Model
“I do it”
“You do it together”
“We do it”
Focused Instruction
Guided Instruction
Collaborative Learning
Independent Learning “You do it alone”
TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY
STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
Source: From Better Learning Through Structured Teaching: A Framework for the Gradual Release of Responsibility, 2nd ed. (p. 3), by D. Fisher & N. Frey,
2014, Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Copyright 2014 by ASCD.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 82IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 82 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 83
pedagogical content knowledge to build student knowledge and then deepen
it. Th ese actions are described as Focused Instruction (3.1), Guided Instruction
(3.2), and Collaborative Learning (3.3). We have deliberately not used the word
steps as a synonym for these actions, as it falsely suggests that the complex
science of teaching can be reduced to a recipe or that it is linear in nature.
Each move is dynamic, as the teacher attends to a student’s idea (noticing),
frames the interaction (“What’s going on right now?”), makes a decision based
on personal PCK (“What shall I do in response?”), and then engages. Th is
sequence occurs countless times throughout a lesson. An observer sitting in
the back of the classroom can provide context but can’t possibly be privy to
the teacher’s internal decision making. Th erefore, as with all other factors of
the FIT Teaching Tool, the discussion of these moments is vital. A checklist
of boxes that state whether a teaching behavior occurred or did not occur
would fail to fully capture the complexities of a teacher’s pedagogical content
knowledge and how the teacher applied it. So although classroom observation
is an important step, it is by no means the only one. As we have noted in
previous chapters, pre- and post-observation refl ective discussions, as well
as artifacts and evidence, are vital to construct a complete portrait of an
educator’s practice.
Factor 3.1: Focused Instruction
Sound instruction begins long before we step to the front of the classroom.
It starts with planning. As we described in Chapter 1, Planning with Purpose
sets the stage for what follows. But plans don’t teach; teachers do. Th e ability to
execute a well-designed plan is just as important as the plan itself. Numerous
studies over the decades have cataloged the behaviors of eff ective teachers
(e.g., Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001; Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008).
All measure the quality of the instructional interactions between the teacher
and the students. Th ey show that eff ective teachers are able to set the learning
intention, provide actionable feedback, make decisions about when and how to
scaff old, and foster the use of academic language in the classroom.
Strong teachers establish the learning intention throughout every lesson,
revisit the learning intention throughout the lesson to redirect, and use the
learning intention to formatively assess students in order to make instructional
decisions (Fisher & Frey, 2011). Establishing a learning intention requires
ongoing investment in the students’ understanding of what they are learning
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 83IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 83 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

84 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
and what they will be doing with the knowledge. Notice that we use a gerund
(establishing) because it is nonfi nite; it indicates action that continually exists
in the present tense. In other words, a learning intention isn’t stated once and
then never revisited. It is the ongoing act of making the learning meaningful
and relevant to the student. Teachers can, and should, reestablish the learning
intention multiple times during a given lesson, especially during transitions and
when students need redirection.
3.1a: Clear learning intentions
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not establish
learning
intentions with
the students.
The teacher establishes the
learning intentions with
students at the beginning of
the lesson segment but does
not return to the learning
intentions at any other time
during the lesson.
The teacher uses the
learning intentions to focus
students throughout the
lesson (such as during
transitions and closure
activities).
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
use the learning intentions
to focus students throughout
the lesson (such as during
transitions and closure
activities).
Th e fi rst ingredient in the Instructing with Intention component concerns
the way content and language learning intentions are conveyed to students.
Th ese come in the form of statements that are delivered verbally, although
many teachers, including ourselves, also write them on the board to keep the
learning targets in front of students. Th e content learning intention describes
what students will be learning about today. It is not the standard or the enduring
understanding, which may take weeks or months to achieve. Th e language
learning intention describes the reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing,
and thinking that students will use during the lesson. For example, a biology
teacher posted her learning intention on the whiteboard and said, “Today you’re
going to learn about the stages of meiosis in cell division, and you’ll use that
vocabulary in your writing to explain each stage.” Near the end of the lesson,
she returned to this intention and used it to formatively assess her students’
understanding and make decisions about the lesson for the following day.
Although the practice of posting and discussing learning intentions seems
pretty straightforward to us, we have seen it being misused in a reductive
way. Several years ago, Doug and Nancy worked with a large district that had
enacted several initiatives to improve student achievement. Th eir community’s
majority language was not English, although the language of instruction was.
Not surprisingly, the district’s major focus targeted teaching and learning issues
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 84IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 84 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 85
for English language learners. Among the practices they required was to clearly
establish a learning intention for each lesson with students. We have written
about this practice extensively, and it has been documented as an eff ective means
for increasing the performance of English language learners (e.g., Echevarria,
Short, & Powers, 2006). Yet resistance was high among teachers, who resented
what they called “the clipboard police” who came into their classrooms and
noted whether the learning intention was written on the whiteboard. Several
teachers confi ded that they had trained their students to recite the learning
intention when questioned so that they would get credit for the requirement that
“students know the learning intention and can repeat it.” You may be thinking,
OK, that’s not that bad. But here’s the worst part. Th e learning intention written
on the board often had nothing to do with what the lesson was about. When
building or district administrators came into the room, the entire class would
pretend the posted learning intention was what the lesson was about.
To be clear, these were not uncaring or uninformed teachers. But the power
of the walk-through form trumped everything else, and its misuse as a crude
yardstick to measure eff ective teaching created bitter feelings that overshadowed
reasonable thought. Establishing clear learning intentions is a good initiative;
reducing this complex practice to two checked boxes is wrongheaded. We
raise this concern now because our experience has been that the importance
of establishing learning intentions can be lost when a behavioristic approach
supersedes teacher development. Th e form must never become a replacement
for its function.
Although a teacher may be clear on what her intentions are when planning,
the results are diminished considerably when learners remain unaware of them.
“School’s hard enough. I shouldn’t have to guess what she wants me to learn,” an
8th grader named Sharise once confessed to Doug. Clearly frustrated, she was
feeling the strain of being lost in the midst of a complex topic her teacher was
covering. Arms crossed and head down, she stood in the hallway outside of her
classroom, which is where Doug fi rst saw her. He felt for the student—and for
her teacher, too.
As someone new to the school, Sharise’s teacher, Kendra McGowan, was
not practiced at establishing learning intentions with students. However, Sharise
had come to expect a posted learning intention, because it was something her
other middle school teachers had done daily. Doug met with Ms. McGowan
later in the day to debrief the incident with Sharise, and he asked about the
learning intention of the lesson. Ms. McGowan explained, “I was really excited
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 85IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 85 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

86 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
about this lesson. Th ey were going to be comparing the weight of objects on
each of the planets in the solar system so they could see the eff ects of gravity on
weight. But I don’t know what went wrong with Sharise. She just got mad and
stormed out of the room. Th at’s when you saw her.”
Doug explained, “Sharise told me she didn’t know what she was supposed
to learn. From your viewpoint, how do you believe you let her in on the learning
intention?” Ms. McGowan thought for a moment and then said, “I had an agenda
written on the board, and I told the kids that we would be studying weight and
mass on diff erent planets,” she said. “Is it possible,” Doug asked, “that Sharise is
not understanding the diff erence between weight and mass, and she can’t go
forward until she does?” For the next few minutes, they discussed the challenges
learners face when they’re unsure about the content, and Ms. McGowan, who
was at the Not Yet Apparent growth level, agreed that she needed more support.
Doug made plans for her to accompany him on a learning walk through several
classrooms the following day.
Th ey met the next morning to discuss the problem of practice, which
was to determine whether the learning intention was clear to students, and
then agreed to talk with a sampling of students in each class. Th e two of them
fi rst stopped at a 6th grade social studies classroom, where Robin Ware was
starting her lesson. Doug selected this classroom as the fi rst destination so that
Ms. McGowan could see an educator at the Teaching growth level. Ms. Ware
displayed the content and language learning intentions on the document camera
and took a few minutes to parse the statements for her students. For example,
she said, “Let’s take a closer look at the term justify in the language learning
intention. Please talk to your partner about what it means to justify, and then
put it into your own words.” As students talked, Ms. Ware asked individuals
about the learning intention. As Ms. McGowan listened to partner discussions,
she saw that the students had written the learning intention in their notebooks
and dated them.
“Why do you do that?” she asked one boy. “Ms. Ware has us check our
notes at the end of class so we can highlight the things that helped us get to the
learning intention,” he said. He added, “It helps me know what questions to ask
when I don’t know something.”
Next, Doug and Ms. McGowan entered Rich Donaldson’s 8th grade
math class about 30 minutes into the period. When queried, the students
Doug and Ms. McGowan spoke to would point to the board and repeat the
learning intention verbatim. However, the math teacher never returned to the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 86IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 86 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 87
learning intention, not even at the end of class. Doug pointed this fact out to
Ms. McGowan, noting that although the students knew where the learning
intention was posted, Mr. Donaldson, at the Developing growth level, was not
yet leveraging the learning intention for maximum benefi t. “Th e close of the
lesson is a natural place to return to the learning intention,” Doug said. “It allows
students to do a bit of self-assessment.”
After visiting three more classrooms, Doug asked Ms. McGowan what she
saw. “I was surprised by the variance inside classrooms and across classrooms,”
she said. “In most of the rooms, the majority of kids I talked to could at least
repeat the learning intention. But in some classrooms, the learning intention
wasn’t used again, at least from what I saw. I’m thinking about your point that
the learning intention can be used in a variety of ways during the lesson.” Doug
then asked, “What classroom do you want to return to now that it’s near the end
of fi rst period?” Ms. McGowan said she’d like to see what was happening in Ms.
Ware’s social studies classroom, because one of the students had told her how
they used the learning intention at the end of the lesson. Th ey returned just as
the social studies teacher was wrapping up the lesson. “I’d like you to read the
learning intention statements you wrote in your notebooks and check in. Use
your partner to identify the notes you took that led to that learning intention,”
she continued. Ms. McGowan sat with the same boy she had visited earlier.
“Show me how you do this,” she said.
A few minutes later the bell rang, signaling the end of the period. As Ms.
Ware approached, Ms. McGowan complimented her on how she made the
learning intention clear. “I’m having trouble with that, and I’d like to get better,”
she said. Ms. Ware said, “Why don’t we eat lunch in my room today, and we can
talk about the lesson. I’d like your feedback, and perhaps I can help you as well.”
Ms. Ware’s collegial support for using learning intentions in the classroom was
a clear demonstration of a Leading growth level.
3.1b: Relevant learning intentions
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not establish the
relevance of the
content.
The teacher loosely or
vaguely establishes the
relevance of the content to
students. The relevance of
the content is not revisited.
Relevance is established
and maintained throughout
the lesson as students are
reminded about why they
are learning the specifi c
content.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to establish and maintain
relevance throughout the
lesson as students are
reminded about why they are
learning the specifi c content.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 87IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 87 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

88 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
It is one thing to make the learning intentions clear to students; it is another
to make the content relevant. By relevance, we don’t mean that everything
students learn has to be of world-changing importance. After all, lots of things
we teach are pretty mundane, yet we all agree that they are critical. Take
syllables, for example. We teach young children to hear and see the syllables
that are present in the language because it helps them fi gure out how to decode
longer words, pronounce them correctly, and spell them more accurately. So
let’s allow our students in on this secret. When we remind students why they
are learning something (not just what they are learning), we appeal to a diff erent
part of their thinking. We tap into their motivation to learn. Relevance is simply
addressing the question “Why are we learning this?” (Hint: Th e answer is not
“Because it’s on the test we’re taking next Monday.”) It is essential that students
see the relevance of what they are learning in order to foster the kind of enduring
understandings that will persist long after the course is fi nished.
We also do not subscribe to the notion that everything that is taught in
school needs to be used in the “real world.” In fact, we don’t like the term “real
world.” Teachers don’t simply prepare students for the real world; they prepare
students for a better world. Relevance can be established when students know
that they will use the content outside the classroom walls (or beyond the screen
of their device). Importantly, relevance is also established when students get to
understand themselves as learners, not to mention when they are aff orded an
opportunity to form opinions about the information.
Science instructional coach Meg Klein, at the Leading level of growth, does
a great job helping colleagues locate the relevance in their content. “Th at’s one
thing our science teachers are really good at doing,” she said. “But they’re not as
practiced at communicating that relevance to their students.” She worked with
the science teachers at two junior and senior high schools in her district to help
them develop this practice. Teams of teachers worked together to augment their
learning intention statements by adding a question: “Why is this important?”
Working in course-alike groups, they developed relevance statements. Here are
a few examples of their work:
• High school earth science: Today’s learning intention is to identify
the stages of the rock cycle, using the terms sedimentary, igneous, and
metamorphic in a discussion with your peers. Why is the rock cycle
important? When we know that rocks move throughout the layers of the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 88IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 88 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 89
Earth to form and recycle, we understand that all this movement creates other
disruptions, like earthquakes, volcanoes, and seafl oor spreading.
• Middle school physical science: Th e learning intention today is to fi nd
out why Newton’s fi rst law of motion is sometimes called the inertia law.
Why is this important? Because this law explains why doing tricks on your
skateboard can be diffi cult.
• High school biology: Today’s learning intention is for you to be able to
demonstrate the transfer of energy through a food chain in an ecosystem,
to explain why trophic levels vary throughout the food chain. Why is this
important? Because when you know why these trophic levels vary, you
understand that protecting the bottom of the food chain is critical in order to
protect species at all levels.
Biology teacher Darcy Lazaroff used the last example with her own
10th grade students in a lesson about energy transfer. Th e lesson she taught
was essentially the same as what she had taught in previous years, but with
additional attention on the relevance of the topic. She began with students
enacting the food chain, each representing a species such as a plant, an
herbivore, or a predator. As in years past, the students learned that because
some energy is lost at each phase, more plants are needed to sustain the
herbivores and the predators. Soon students returned to their seats to learn
about trophic levels and ecological pyramids. But the diff erence this year was
in Ms. Lazaroff ’s being more intentional about building relevance. At several
key points during the lesson, Ms. Lazaroff turned students’ attention back to
the critical issue of protecting grasslands and forests to preserve the habitat
of ground squirrels and foxes. She spoke to the instructional coach, Ms. Klein,
about the experience. “Th e quality of their exit tickets was much higher than
those I collected last year,” Ms. Lazaroff said. “I’ve done the lesson a number
of times, and the kids always like it because they get to wear signs saying what
species they represent, and there’s a good deal of movement around the room
as the ecological pyramids begin to form.” Th e biology teacher continued, “But
this time I had students writing about conservation eff orts and the importance
of national parks. I didn’t explicitly teach this, but I was blown away by the
connections they made between this content and other knowledge they had.”
Debriefi ng after the lesson, the instructional coach asked the biology
teacher to refl ect on her processes using the FIT Teaching Tool. “I’m feeling
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 89IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 89 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

90 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
very comfortable with placing myself at the Teaching level of growth for
using clear learning intention statements,” Ms. Lazaroff said. “I’ve been doing
this consistently for over a year now. But when it comes to relevant learning
intentions, I’d say I’m at a Developing level of growth. Th is is new to me, and I’m
only just beginning to use it, but I’m already seeing how it is encouraging [my
students] to think critically.” After pausing, she said, “I think I’m going to add
the question ‘Why is this important?’ to the section of the whiteboard where
I post the daily learning intention. Th is will help remind me to make the case
for relevance.”
Th e instructional coach checked in with Dave Schultz, the middle school
physical science teacher. Ms. Klein explained that Mr. Schultz was at the
Teaching level of growth for this criterion, as he consistently linked his content
to its relevance for his students. His classroom featured the question WHY? in
large letters over the center of his whiteboard, and from the fi rst day of school,
he reminded his students to ask this question of him when they didn’t see the
relevance of what they were learning. “Th ey keep me on my toes,” he chuckled.
“Nothing like a 12-year-old asking why? all the time.” In fact, it was Mr. Schultz’s
expertise in this area that prompted Ms. Klein to bring the issue of relevancy to
the science team. She asked the middle school science teacher to partner with
her to design the professional learning session on the topic. Mr. Schultz used
examples from his own practice, and he video-recorded several of his students
explaining why an understanding of matter and its interactions, taught a few
weeks earlier, was relevant to them. In addition, he showed the rest of the
team how he started with disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts to
formulate transfer goals (Planning with Purpose 1.1a), and then he distilled the
ideas into a series of relevant learning intention statements. When Mr. Schultz
met with an administrator near the end of the year for a summative evaluation,
he used this as an example of his Leading level of growth for this criterion.
First-year chemistry teacher Loren Owens left the science team meeting
in what he later described to his induction coach as “a state of cognitive
dissonance.” He said, “It seriously never occurred to me that I should even be
doing this. I don’t remember my master teacher from last year ever talking
about this. I just assumed the students would connect the dots. Dave’s video
[of his own students explaining the relevancy] shocked me. Th ese were middle
schoolers talking about atoms and molecules in ways my high school juniors
can’t.” He and the induction coach discussed his next steps. “Well, up until now,
I’d be at the Not Yet Apparent level of growth,” he admitted. “Not on my radar at
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 90IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 90 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 91
all. But that’s going to change. If I can’t make chemistry relevant to my students,
I’m wasting their time and mine.”
3.1c: Accurate representation of critical content
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not provide
accurate content.
The teacher provides
accurate content that is
loosely linked with learning
intentions. The instruction
prevents students from
engaging in related tasks or
fails to provide them with
the appropriate foundation.
The teacher provides
accurate content that is
clearly linked with the
learning intentions. The
instruction ensures students
have the foundation
necessary for the tasks they
will accomplish.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to provide accurate
representations of critical
content that are linked with
the learning intentions and
provide a foundation for
related tasks.
Th ink about any academic or growth skill you’ve ever learned, and chances
are good that it’s something you fi rst observed someone else doing. Perhaps you
studied the stance of a favorite baseball player in order to improve your swing.
Or you leaned in closer to the television when an actor you admired talked
about how he prepared for a role. You witnessed someone more skilled or
knowledgeable than you doing something with that skill or knowledge, applying
it. Teachers are able to accomplish similar feats when they provide students
with representations of the content under investigation—by modeling, thinking
aloud, lecturing, presenting a video, staging a demonstration, and so on. Each of
these instructional experiences is designed to develop students’ cognitive and
growth skills.
It’s also true that modeling, lecturing, video viewing, and demonstrating
can be overdone. Stream-of-consciousness ramblings can cause students to
become more confused. We can all remember a very boring lecture, modeling
that did not capture our interests, and video clips that were not relevant to our
learning. Also note that think-alouds lose their power when too many skills or
concepts are modeled all at once.
When done well, however, the representation of critical content provides
students with information, strategies, ideas, and skills that they can and will
use. Figure 3.2 lists common ways that teachers can represent critical content.
Of course, this is not an exhaustive list, and there are other valuable ways to
provide students with access to information and ideas.
April Mendoza, a special education support teacher, had been Developing
her representation skills through modeling, but she had seen few results with
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 91IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 91 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

92 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
her students. She asked a 2nd grade colleague, Susanna Estrada, to watch her
as she modeled thinking aloud about a piece of informational text. Ms. Estrada
audio-recorded Ms. Mendoza as she read aloud a passage about types of trees
and then thought aloud:
Th e fi rst thing I noticed was that there were these illustrations on the
side of the page of three diff erent types of deciduous trees. But then I
didn’t know what that word meant, so I knew I had to read. I read the
fi rst sentence and saw there was an exclamation mark at the end. Why
would the author put an exclamation mark there? So I read it again,
because it didn’t seem like a surprise to me. [Rereads sentence.] Th ere
are more than a billion trees in the United States! Oh, OK. Now I see it’s
not a surprise. Th e author was using an exclamation mark to emphasize
a point. A billion is a big number. I have to stop and think about how
many zeros I would need to make a billion.
Later, the two teachers ate lunch together in Ms. Mendoza’s classroom.
“I’m going to play back the recording of your think-aloud from this morning, but
before I do, I’d like to hear your teaching point,” said Ms. Estrada. Ms. Mendoza
answered, “I wanted them to see how to use illustrations and text together.”
However, after listening to the recording, she said, “Boy, I’m all over the map
in what, two minutes? I started talking about deciduous, but I got sidetracked
with the exclamation point and the big number.” Ms. Estrada nodded. “I have
to agree with you. It would be hard for your students to follow, especially when
they’re not sure what they’re listening for.” She reached across the table to hand
her colleague a planning sheet for a think-aloud (see Figure 3.3). “When I fi rst
Figure 3.2 | Instructional Approaches for Representing Critical Content
Modeling —Providing students with an example of the thinking that the teacher does, as when a teacher thinks
aloud to solve a math problem.
Lecture—Providing students with information about a specifi c topic, as when a teacher explains the process
of mitosis.
Video viewing—Providing students with information using diverse media, as when a teacher shows students a
clip of a historical reenactment.
Demonstration—Providing students with a direct experience that includes an explanation, as when a teacher
shows students how to mold clay on a potter’s wheel.
Read aloud—Providing students access to a text, as when a teacher reads a science picture book aloud to students.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 92IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 92 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 93
Figure 3.3 | Planning Sheet for Developing a Think-Aloud
1. Name the strategy, skill, or task.
Example: “Today I am going to show you how to
combine sentences to make more interesting and
complex statements.”
2. State the purpose of the strategy, skill,
or task.
Example: “It’s important as a writer to be able to
construct sentences that aren’t repetitive or choppy.
Combining sentences is one way to make sure your
sentences read more smoothly.”
3. Explain when the strategy or skill is used.
Example: “After I have written a passage, I reread to
see if I have choppy sentences or if I am repeating
information unnecessarily. When I notice that’s
occurred, I look for ways to combine sentences.”
4. Use analogies to link prior knowledge to
new learning.
Example: “I like to think of this as making sure I
am making a straight path for my reader to follow.
When I eliminate choppy or redundant sentences,
it’s like making a straight path of ideas for them
to follow.”
5. Demonstrate how the skill, strategy, or task
is completed.
Example: “I’m going to show you three short,
choppy sentences. Let’s look fi rst at information that
we can cross out because it is repetitive. Then I’m
going to combine those three sentences into one
longer and more interesting sentence.”
6. Alert learners to errors to avoid.
Example: “I have to be careful not to cut out too
much information so that I don’t lose the meaning.
I also need to watch out for sentences that become
too long. A reader can lose the meaning of a
sentence that’s too long.”
7. Assess the use of the skill.
Example: “Now I’m going to reread my new
sentence to see if it makes sense.”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 93IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 93 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

94 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
started developing my think-aloud skills, I used this to make notes about what
I was going to say. I’ve got a structure to it now, but this helped me remember
to do things like naming the strategy and using analogies. We’ve got a few
more minutes. I can help you sketch one out for tomorrow,” said Ms. Estrada,
exhibiting a Leading growth level.
Instructional coach Daniel Min met with 4th grade teacher Hilda Salazar
for a post-observation coaching conversation. Th e previous day, Mr. Min had
observed in Ms. Salazar’s mathematics class, and now they were debriefi ng the
lesson. After reviewing the learning intention of the lesson and the formative
assessment information that the mathematics teacher had gathered, the
instructional coach turned his attention to a worked example Ms. Salazar
had off ered. “As you mentioned, your learning intention was to have students
examine a worked example of a functions table, then use the same processes
to complete their own functions,” he said. “But I noticed that you gave them a
direct explanation, rather than modeling and thinking aloud. Can you talk about
why you did that?” Ms. Salazar explained that she had thought at the time that
a direct explanation would be the best route. “Th ey did simpler functions tables
the previous two days, and I thought another explanation of the formula would
be enough,” she said. “It sounds like you’re questioning your decision, Hilda.
Why?” the instructional coach asked. Ms. Salazar replied, “When I checked in
on the groups, I kept running into lots of confusion. I had to go to quite a bit
of guided instruction to get them moving again. And I’m still not sure they’re
there yet.” Th e coach saw this as an opportunity to advance the conversation,
so he asked, “What’s going to happen tomorrow? Th ey’ll still be confused.” Ms.
Salazar smiled. “I’m going to take a step back and model my thinking about how
I complete a function table, and then I’ll ask them to explain their thinking. I
moved too fast. It’s time to bring them back to the mathematical thinking, not
just plugging numbers into a formula.”
Although in this case Ms. Salazar’s lesson featured no modeling or
demonstrating, putting her at the Not Yet Apparent level for this criterion, it was
clear from the coaching conversation that she knew the benefi ts of providing
students with representations of content. She had erred in not including a
representation of critical content in this lesson but in refl ection saw that doing
so might have been useful. All of us realize that there are times when we don’t
use the right tools for the job. However, Ms. Salazar’s pedagogical content
knowledge was solid, and the following day she invited Mr. Min to watch her as
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 94IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 94 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 95
she modeled and thought aloud. She displayed a partially completed function
table on the document camera and began:
I’m going to talk about how I fi gure out a rule for completing a function
table. Th e purpose of a function table is to complete the ordered pairs
so that I can plot them correctly onto a graph. Th at word “pair” is
important, because it reminds me that each pair has to match all the
others, like the shoes in my closet. Each pair is diff erent from the other,
but they are all the same size. Ordered pairs in a function table look
diff erent from one another, but they all work with the same rule. But I
don’t want to just guess, because that might take a really long time, and
there’s a good chance that I’ll be wrong. Instead, I am going to look at
the number pattern for the input and output. [Pauses.] Because these
output numbers get larger, I’m thinking that the pattern will be either
an addition or a multiplication rule. I’ll try addition fi rst, because it is
a small change. Th e output number is 4 more than the input number,
so that might be the rule. When I look at the second ordered pair, the
output is again 4 more than the input. Now I am considering whether
+4 is the rule. When I think I have developed a rule, I need to recheck it
to see if it always works. If it doesn’t hold true, then I need to start again.
But fi rst I’ll try +4 for all the ordered pairs to see if it works. [Calculates.]
Yes, that works! So now I’ll write +4 for the rule for this function table.
Mr. Min smiled as Ms. Salazar fi nished her think-aloud. On this day, her
use of modeling and thinking aloud placed her at the Teaching level of growth.
She transitioned students to guided instruction with another example and then
had them work with partners to complete a more challenging one. Th is time,
her students were more successful. She told Mr. Min later, “I had to smile when
I heard one of the kids coaching her partner using some of the same language I
had used during the think-aloud. I guess it worked!”
Factor 3.2: Guided Instruction
Th e ability to provide guided instruction to an individual student, a small group,
or even a larger one comes with years of experience and experimentation. First
and foremost, it requires that the teacher hold a fi rm understanding of the
learning progression of novices as they acquire and master new knowledge.
Second, the teacher needs to continually pose the same internal question: “What
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 95IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 95 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

96 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
does this child’s response tell me about what she knows and doesn’t know?”
Only then can the teacher provide the kinds of scaff olds needed to move the
child’s understanding forward.
Th e expert blind spot (Nathan & Petrosino, 2003) interferes with a
teacher’s ability to provide guided instruction, because the teacher’s disciplinary
knowledge obscures knowledge of students’ developmental learning needs.
Some teachers are able to reduce their expert blind spot rapidly; others never
do. It seems that those with high levels of formal disciplinary knowledge but
low levels of content pedagogical knowledge incorrectly emphasize the need
to learn formal rules before students can learn real-world examples, when, in
fact, the opposite is true (National Research Council, 2005). In other words, you
need to know 10th graders, not just 10th grade geometry. With experience, and
a willingness to explore student thinking, skilled teachers reduce this expert
blind spot and become more adept at noticing student needs and scaff olding
support based on student responses.
3.2a: Notices student needs
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not notice
students’
misconceptions,
errors, or
confusions.
The teacher only occasionally
notices students’
misconceptions, errors, or
confusions, as evidenced by
minimal follow-up probes.
The teacher notices students’
misconceptions, errors,
or confusions by asking
questions to probe their
thinking, paying attention to
nonverbal cues, or analyzing
student work.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their
ability to notice students’
misconceptions, errors,
or confusions by asking
questions to probe their
thinking, paying attention to
nonverbal cues, or analyzing
student work.
Th e concept of teacher noticing has gained momentum in the last decade
as a means for shifting instructional practices away from the “sage on the stage”
to the “guide on the side.” Van Es and Sherin (2002) describe noticing in three
stages:  “(a) identifying what is important or noteworthy about a classroom
situation; (b) making connections between the specifi cs of classroom interactions
and the broader principles of teaching and learning they represent; and (c) using
what one knows about the context to reason about classroom interactions”
(p. 573). Th is concept diff ers from “with-it-ness,” which describes a teacher’s
ability to sense minute changes in the physical and emotional climate of the
classroom. In fact, many teachers generally engage in noticing behaviors only
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 96IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 96 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 97
intermittently, with more of their attention focused on classroom organization
and management (Tekkumru Kisa & Stein, 2015).
In teacher noticing, the attention is focused on student thinking, as the
teacher hypothesizes the student’s current understanding and is able to respond
with scaff olds that accelerate learning. High school administrator Winston
James reviewed his fi rst-semester observations of Hank Simmons, a physical
education teacher. Mr. James wanted this fi rst-semester debriefi ng to focus on
guided instruction, and especially on noticing. In previous observations, Mr.
James had noted that the PE teacher was growing in his ability to establish
learning intentions, and he was becoming more adept at planning lessons across
larger themes. However, a notable area for growth was teacher noticing. After
reviewing Mr. Simmons’s accomplishments during the fi rst half of the year, Mr.
James shifted the topic to noticing.
“I’ve been in your classroom and on the fi eld with you three times so far
this year, and I’d like to see you transfer what you’re doing well on the fi eld back
into your classroom,” the administrator began. “I’ve seen you really attuned to
student needs on the fi eld. For example, when you were teaching the volleyball
unit, you closely observed their serves, and you stepped in to make corrections
that seemed so small, yet even I could see they made a diff erence.”
Mr. Simmons responded, “Th anks. I’m glad you saw that. It’s really common
for kids to pick their back foot up off the ground when they’re serving instead of
keeping their toes in contact with the fl oor.” “And why is that a problem?” asked
Mr. James. “Well,” Mr. Simmons replied, “they end up launching the ball right
into the net!” “Th at’s a great example of your level of noticing,” said Mr. James.
“Right now, I would place you at the Developing level of growth, because you are
defi nitely doing a lot of noticing on the fi eld. But in your classroom, I’ve seen
that you don’t consistently respond with a follow-up probe when a student has
an incorrect answer. You’ll say something like ‘I’ve got it here in my notes,’ ‘Can
anyone help him?’ or ‘Who else can answer that?’ Do you see why that would
be a problem?”
Mr. Simmons thought for a moment and then said, “If I just said, ‘Next’
when a player didn’t clear the top of the net, that player wouldn’t know how to
improve. She’d probably just keep making the same mistake again. It’s the same
eff ect when a student answers incorrectly and I move on to the next student.
All that kid hears is the correct answer, but she doesn’t know why hers was not
correct.” Th e administrator responded by saying, “I’d like you to sit in on the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 97IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 97 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

98 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
classroom portion of Marie Handler’s PE class tomorrow, and then let’s talk
again. Use that time to script how she responds when a student has an incorrect
response or has a misconception.”
Th e following day, Mr. Simmons arrived a few minutes before Ms.
Handler’s class was to begin. Her students were studying the human circulatory
system in order to relate it to their fi tness levels. As she discussed key concepts
with her students, she probed for common misconceptions. When she asked
about the importance of the systemic and pulmonary circulatory systems, Jorge
responded, “Well, the systemic system’s more important, because if it stopped
working, the heart wouldn’t get any blood.” In response to this incorrect answer,
Ms. Handler said, “You’ve raised an interesting point. Can you talk more about
your reasoning?” During the next several minutes, she and the class discussed
his conclusion. Th e teacher then said, “Now let’s consider what we know
when somebody goes into shock. Th ink about the circulatory system. What’s
happening?” Jorge now realized his error. “When a person goes into shock, it’s
because the blood fl ow decreases to the limbs,” he said. Th e teacher asked, “And
where is the limited blood fl ow going?” Jorge responded, “Pulmonary.”
Th e administrator and Mr. Simmons met up again during his planning
period. “Tell me about your experience in Ms. Handler’s room,” said Mr. James.
Mr. Simmons relayed the experience with Jorge concerning the circulatory
system and listed several other responses Ms. Handler used, noting that she was
at the Teaching level of growth. Mr. Simmons said, “I observed her really notice
a lot of things, and she had ways to check out her assumptions, such as ‘Tell me
more about that’ or ‘Can you elaborate?’ and ‘Can you give me an example?’”
“Th ese probes alone don’t unpack student misunderstandings, but they
certainly signal that the teacher is noticing something and wants to explore
it further,” said Mr. James. “Tell me your plan for integrating this into your
classroom practice.”
In an elementary school not far away, Marla Henderson was sharing a
video collection of her lessons with a 3rd grade colleague, Isaac Serbin, who
had asked for help with noticing. Mr. Serbin started the conversation by saying,
“Patti [the instructional coach] has commented on my teaching several times,
saying that I don’t usually notice when students are confused or struggle. I
think I follow the lesson plans we develop pretty carefully, but then my students
don’t do as well as the others on our benchmark assessments. I’m thinking that
noticing may be something I need to be better at.” Mr. Serbin is at the Not Yet
Apparent level of growth and wants to improve in this area.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 98IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 98 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 99
Ms. Henderson said, “I know that I’ve been teaching 3rd grade for several
years, and my experience helps me notice students’ understanding, but noticing
is also something I’ve really worked on. I work hard to pay close attention to
students when they’re talking or thinking. I’m not perfect, and I’m sure I miss
a lot, but if you’re interested, we can watch some of my videos or Mr. Allen’s
[another member of the 3rd grade team] to see how we notice students’ thinking
and identify their misunderstandings.” Ms. Henderson is at the Leading level of
growth on this indicator. As they talk, she pauses the video for them to discuss
her actions so that Mr. Serbin can identify specifi c teacher moves that relate
to noticing.
3.2b: Scaff olds support
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not scaffold
support for
students.
The teacher at times offers
questions, prompts, and
cues to scaffold support
of student learning but at
other times moves to direct
explanations instead of
scaffolding fi rst.
The teacher scaffolds support
for students using prompts
and cues when student
responses demonstrate
incorrect or partial
understanding, reserving
direct explanations only for
situations when prompts
and cues are insuffi cient.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
scaffold support for students
using prompts and cues
when student responses
demonstrate incorrect or
partial understanding,
reserving direct explanations
only for situations when
prompts and cues are
insuffi cient.
After teacher noticing, then what? Th e key to guided instruction is the
scaff olding that teachers provide as a catalyst to the learning process. Th ese
scaff olds, which come in the form of questions, prompts, and cues, provide just
enough information to spark the learner. However, the skillful use of prompts
and cues takes time to acquire and is often the line of demarcation between
novice and skilled teachers (Frey & Fisher, 2010). A teacher with less experience
at off ering scaff olds is more likely to simply tell students the answer when they
give an incorrect response rather than explore what they may already know.
For instance, if a student reads “horse” instead of “house,” several diff erent
hypotheses about the error can be formed (Fisher & Frey, 2014a):
• Th e child understands many consonant sounds.
• Th e child may not be attending closely to the word.
• Th e child may not yet be attending to the medial position in the word.
• Th e vowel combination may be unfamiliar.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 99IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 99 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

100 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th at rapid formulation of a hypothesis must now be followed by a teacher
response. Th e possibilities for responding to the error include the following:
• Tellling: “Th at word is ‘house.’ Read it again, please.”
• Scaff olding: “Look again. Does that sound right?” [Not attending to print]
• Scaff olding: “You missed the middle sound. Look again at the middle
letters and try it again.” [Diffi culty with medial positions]
• Scaff olding: “Th e letters ‘ou’ make the /ow/ sound. Try the word again
using that sound.” [Unfamiliar with this vowel combination]
A major drawback in telling the student the answer as a fi rst response is
that you never get to test your hypothesis. Th e fi rst scaff olds we off er to students
are designed to prompt them to consider previously learned but temporarily
forgotten information. Th at’s the nature of learning—it’s the consolidation of
isolated information that takes time. Prompts may be about any of the following:
• Background knowledge—Th is refers to content that the student already
knows, has been taught, or has experienced but has temporarily forgotten or
is not using correctly. (During a lesson about weather, the teacher says, “What
do you remember about how clouds form?”)
• Process or procedure—Established or generally agreed-upon rules or
guidelines are not being followed, and a reminder will help resolve the error
or misconception. (When a student incorrectly multiplies two fractions, the
teacher says, “Look closely. Have you done the fi rst step, which is to reduce
the fractions?”)
• Refl ection—Asking students to be metacognitive and think about
their thinking can then be used to determine next steps or the solution to
a problem. (“Th ink back to our lesson’s learning intention today. Have you
accomplished that?”)
• Heuristics—Th ese informal problem-solving procedures are used to
help learners develop their own way to solve problems. Th ey do not have to be
the same as others’ heuristics, but they do need to work. (“What’s a way you
could rapidly count all those objects, without having to count out each one?”)
Prompts such as these are often all that’s needed to get student learning
rolling again. But sometimes students need more overt cues that shift their
attention to the salient information they need. Novice learners will sometimes
perceive everything and nothing all at once. Either everything is equally
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 100IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 100 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 101
important, or none of it is (many of us felt this way during our very fi rst
classroom experiences). Cues come in four diff erent forms and are often paired
with one another to strengthen the cue, as when combining a gestural cue with
a verbal one:
• Visual cues focus student attention on a portion of text, such as when
highlighting a sentence or circling a word.
• Verbal cues rely on both what is said and how it is said, such as slowing
down a statement so that the child can complete it (“When two vowels go
walking . . .”).
• Gestural cues include body movements and motions, such as pointing,
turning, or making hand motions to emphasize a phrase.
• Environmental cues are placed in the classroom to spur student
thinking, such as a word wall or a language chart.
Fifth-grade chair Linda Matsushita was asked by her principal to support
the teachers in her grade level as they expanded and deepened their use of
scaff olds in student learning. Ms. Matsushita had been placed at the Leading
level of growth for this criterion the previous year because of her professional
development work on the topic with the entire school. Now she had been given
release time to work with colleagues on their practice. Her fi rst classroom stop
was in Kathy Blake’s social studies class. Ms. Blake had been anticipating her
visit and had placed an extra chair for Ms. Matsushita to sit in while she met
with a small group. “We’re looking at documents about the Stamp Act,” she
explained. “Th anks for waiting,” she said to her group. “Where were we?”
Jason replied, “We were talking about why the colonists were upset about
the Stamp Act.” His teacher asked, “And based on what we’ve read so far, what’s
your conclusion?”
“Oh, they were defi nitely upset,” he said confi dently.
“But why do you say that? Can you point to some evidence in the text?” He
replied that one document said, “Awake, awake my countrymen and defeat those
who want to enslave us.” Ms. Blake asked, “Is there another document that holds
a diff erent perspective?” Th e children looked, and Ms. Blake slid the correct one
to Ben, who was looking confused. Ben began reading silently and then said,
“Th is one from the tax collector in Philadelphia is all about how bad the other
colonists are, like that they’re being disrespectful to the king of England.” Over
the next 10 minutes, Ms. Blake, at the Teaching growth level, off ered several
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 101IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 101 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

102 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
more scaff olds to her students, guiding their thinking but refraining from telling
them the answers herself. As Ms. Matsushita excused herself, she thanked her
colleague and made notes for use in their next team meeting.
Her next visit was with Sara Kitchener, who had already stated that she
was at a loss for what guided instruction looks like in the math classroom.
She had self-identifi ed at the Developing level of growth. Ms. Matsushita
came equipped with a sheet of prompts and cues that could be used for this
purpose. Th e teachers had already agreed that Ms. Matsushita would meet with
a small group of Ms. Kitchener’s students, while Ms. Kitchener would watch
the demonstration lesson. After the lesson, Ms. Matsushita and Ms. Kitchener
discussed the prompts and cues Ms. Matsushita had used, and why. “It really
turned out to be an incredibly valuable time for both of us,” Ms. Matsushita said
later. “Sara’s questions really caused me to consider how I know when to deliver
a prompt or off er a cue.”
Later, she observed Brad Michael’s classroom. Th e students in the class
were working productively in groups, and Mr. Michael was meeting with
students individually to conference with them about their writing. On this visit,
Mr. Michael was rated as Not Applicable because the two individual meetings
with students he had while being observed did not allow him to scaff old support.
Both students expressed their ideas clearly and made a compelling case for their
fl ow of ideas. Mr. Michael did not have the opportunity to scaff old at that time.
Having said that, Ms. Matsushita had observed Mr. Michael using scaff olding
with students numerous times and did not feel the need to talk with him about
this aspect of his classroom.
Factor 3.3: Collaborative Learning
Th e merits of creating collaborative learning experiences are extensive. Benefi ts
to students include academic achievement (Slavin, 1996), responsiveness to
peers’ needs (Ashman & Gillies, 1997), and transfer of learning (Pai, Sears,
& Maeda, 2015) when compared to individualistic learning experiences. We
regard this last point as especially compelling. A chief goal of learning is to
promote transfer of knowledge such that learners can apply skills and concepts
in new situations. Collaborative learning opportunities allow students to
consolidate their learning through tasks that are novel and complex enough to
promote interaction and interdependence (Fisher & Frey, 2014a). In fact, we
feel so strongly about collaborative learning that our own school’s goal is that
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 102IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 102 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 103
approximately 50 percent of our instructional minutes are spent in student-
to-student interactions. However, collaborative learning requires planning and
instruction. Simply moving four desks together will not automatically result
in consolidation and transfer. Collaborative learning requires establishing
routines, an ability to construct suffi ciently complex tasks, and provision of
language supports to facilitate discourse and production.
3.3a: Interactive learning routines
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not use
collaborative
learning
routines.
The teacher uses
collaborative learning
routines but does not
teach the processes and
procedures necessary for
students to maximize
instructional time.
The teacher systematically
teaches the process and
procedural skills needed
for collaborative learning
routines that will be used
throughout the unit or
school year. This is apparent
as students demonstrate
clear understanding of
collaborative learning
routines in order to
maximize instructional time.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to support students in
acquiring the process and
procedural skills needed
to engage in collaborative
learning routines in order to
maximize instructional time.
Creating collaborative learning begins with establishing routines so that
students can focus on the learning rather than the logistics. Most teachers have
a few favorite arrangements that they like to use, but true collaborative learning
(not just group activities) requires a thoughtful match between the students,
the task, and the arrangement.
Th e roots of collaborative learning can be traced to the infl uential work
of David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson, who developed the fi ve conditions
that are needed in order to develop positive social and academic interactions
(Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991):
• Positive interdependence—Th e fi rst feature focuses on the
interconnectedness of the learning situation. Each member of the group must
be important for the overall success of the endeavor.
• Face-to-face interaction—In these interactions, students should teach
each other, check each other’s understanding, discuss concepts and ideas, and
make connections between the content and their own lives.
• Individual and group accountability—Students must understand the
products that are expected from the learning task and be held accountable for
the overall result as well as their individual contributions.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 103IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 103 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

104 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
• Interpersonal and small-group skills—For groups to work eff ectively
and effi ciently, each member must possess and use the requisite social skills.
Often, specifi c skills such as those related to leadership, decision making, trust
building, turn taking, active listening, and confl ict management must be taught.
• Group processing—A fi nal feature involves the group members
themselves discussing their progress and what they might do to improve their
productivity or working relationships.
To these conditions we add two important elements that elevate the learn-
ing that occurs. Th e fi rst is that the task needs to be complex enough that stu-
dents have reason to interact with one another. Th e second is that the teacher is
an active presence in the learning. In traditional cooperative learning, the group
is left to itself to resolve the problem, with the teacher providing minimal levels
of support so as not to interfere with the group’s processes. In collaborative
learning, the teacher moves in and out of groups, often providing short guided
instruction to move the group forward when it loses momentum.
However, the success of the group is infl uenced by the preparation of the
teacher (and that’s clearly related to Planning with Purpose). A good starting
point is considering the necessary prerequisites for making collaborative
learning a successful experience:
• Plan for purposeful talk by incorporating standards, establishing
clear learning intentions, and identifying learning, language, and social
objectives for lessons.
• Create an environment that encourages academic discourse,
including the physical room arrangement, teaching the routines of talk,
and scaff olding language.
• Manage the academic discourse through grouping and collaborative
activities that increase confi dence and provide students with ways to
consolidate learning with their peers.
• Assess language development using practical tools for monitoring
progress and identifying areas of need. (Fisher, Frey, & Rothenberg,
2008, p. 2)
Th is last element is crucial in collaborative learning, in that a major pur-
pose is to foster the authentic use of academic language. Th is aspect can be
especially challenging for English language learners, who may require more
specialized supports in the form of language frames. We discuss this ele-
ment later in the chapter, but for now we’ll refer you to an extensive table of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 104IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 104 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 105
collaborative learning routines and linguistic frames for supporting students
that we’ve gathered as an online resource at http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/
books/CollaborativeLearningRoutines .
High school administrator Gwen Hayes just fi nished her third semester
of using the FIT Teaching Tool to foster teacher growth. She observed teachers
at the school multiple times a year, with pre- and post-conference meetings to
discuss planning and debrief. Th e focus for her school district was collaborative
conversations, and the staff had already attended several subject-specifi c formal
professional learning sessions. However, teachers varied widely in the extent to
which they had adopted this instructional approach. At the high implementa-
tion end was Isla Peterson, an experienced mathematics teacher who used col-
laborative learning routines to increase the amount of mathematical discourse
occurring in her room. Ms. Hayes reviewed the pre-conference notes she had
collected when she met with Ms. Peterson and added information about Ms.
Peterson’s plan to conduct a learning walk with her professional learning com-
munity in two weeks. Later, after observing Ms. Peterson’s class, Ms. Hayes read
her fi eld notes about the video-capture the teacher was doing with one group.
As Ms. Peterson had explained to the administrator at the time, she planned
to use the video to discuss how her students were using the Numbered Heads
Together protocol she had introduced several weeks before. Her purpose was
twofold, as she would fi rst discuss the video with her own students and then
use it later with her collaborative planning team. As Ms. Hayes refl ected on the
math teacher’s growth level, she placed her in the Leading category.
She then turned her attention to the notes she collected for Don Veltri, a
9th grade algebra teacher. During their pre-conference, Mr. Veltri said that he
was struggling to put collaborative learning routines in place. He had visited
Ms. Peterson’s class before but confessed to struggling with longer tasks. Ms.
Hayes suggested that he scale back his eff orts, as he had been trying several
new routines each week. Th ey agreed that he would focus on the Explorers
and Settlers collaborative learning routine fi rst, because he was feeling more
successful with it. When Ms. Hayes observed in his classroom, he had a series
of short algebra problems for students to work on together, although there was
a bit of confusion at the start of the activity. Ms. Hayes made a note to discuss
ways to make the directions clearer to students the next time and placed Mr.
Veltri in the Developing category of the criterion.
Ms. Hayes conducted her third observation in Wendy Franklin’s geometry
class. Ms. Franklin spoke at length about the ways she used collaborative
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 105IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 105 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/CollaborativeLearningRoutines/pdf/books/CollaborativeLearningRoutines

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/CollaborativeLearningRoutines/pdf/books/CollaborativeLearningRoutines

106 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
learning every day in her classroom and told Ms. Hayes that her students would
be completing collaborative posters during the lesson. During the 30-minute
observation, Ms. Franklin’s students were engaged in extended small-group
work as they determined geometric proofs. Th e members of each team were
given diff erent-colored markers and worked together to compose the correct
proof. Th e teacher sat with each group to check for understanding and provide
guided instruction as needed. Ms. Hayes took notes on the ease with which the
teams got to work, and several students told her that they complete collaborative
posters nearly every week. Th e administrator closed out her notes for the post-
observation debriefi ng by placing Ms. Franklin at the Teaching level of growth.
While visiting Ms. Franklin’s room, Ms. Hayes noticed a special education
teacher working individually with a student who needed additional support to
access the course materials. In this situation, the special education teacher’s
growth would be rated as Not Applicable because there was no need for her to
engage in collaborative learning routines at that time.
Ms. Hayes saved her most diffi cult situation for last. Mike Switalski, a pre-
calculus teacher, had made it clear in his pre-conference meeting that he did not
subscribe to the notion that collaborative learning should occupy a signifi cant
portion of his instructional time. A veteran teacher with more than 20 years
of experience, Mr. Switalski argued that higher-level mathematics courses like
his did not function best with a group approach. “Th ey aren’t going to run into
anything like this in college,” he had said. True to form, he did not have any
collaborative learning going on in his classroom when Ms. Hayes observed.
Instead, he lectured while students took notes for 35 minutes, and then he
assigned homework and asked students to “use their time wisely” during the
last 20 minutes of class. Of course, teachers can make lectures meaningful,
but students should also be expected to consolidate their understanding
collaboratively during the lesson.
Ms. Hayes knew that Mr. Switalski was not an uncaring teacher—just a
resistant one. She also knew that he had expressed interest in continuing his
learning. Ms. Hayes decided she would meet with her supervisor to talk further
about Mr. Switalski’s professional learning, as he was clearly at the Not Yet
Apparent level of growth for this category. Among the notes she made was
to connect with the local university math department to see if Mr. Switalski
could observe college coursework. Following her discussion with her assistant
superintendent, Ms. Hayes met with Mr. Switalski and reviewed his progress.
She noted that the lack of collaborative learning was a signifi cant concern, as
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 106IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 106 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 107
were his planning and his assessments. Th eir conversation was respectful, and
Ms. Hayes said, “Mike, there are several areas that are consistently not evident
in your classroom. We’ve talked about this several times, and I’m not seeing any
progress. I am recommending you for targeted improvement. I have requested
a district peer coach to support you. I will continue to observe your progress,
but you will have a peer to support you as well. I really think you can do this, if
you want to.”
3.3b: Task complexity
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not
monitor student
collaborative
work.
The teacher uses
collaborative learning, but
the tasks are insuffi ciently
complex to challenge
students’ thinking. The
teacher monitors students as
they work collaboratively.
Collaborative work is
suffi ciently complex to allow
students an opportunity to
use a variety of resources
to creatively apply their
knowledge; the task
challenges students’
thinking. The teacher
monitors groups’ progress in
the event that the task might
need adjustment.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
design collaborative work
that is suffi ciently complex
to allow students an
opportunity to use a variety
of resources to creatively
apply their knowledge. The
teacher supports colleagues
in their ability to monitor
groups’ progress in the
event that the task might
need adjustment.
We have intentionally used the term complexity in this section to distinguish
it from diffi culty. Based on Webb’s (2002) work on depth of knowledge, we
defi ne these two terms as follows:
• Diffi culty—A measure of time, eff ort, or work required to complete a task.
• Complexity—A measure of the thinking, action, or knowledge that is
needed to complete the task.
Simply making tasks more diffi cult will not ensure that students will think
more creatively or critically. Assigning nine more math problems does not
necessarily make the task more complex, but it will take more time. Marisa
Ramirez, refl ecting on her expectations, said, “I always required that essays be
1,500 words. And I knew that students would just add sentences to meet that
requirement. I realized I was making the task more diffi cult but not always more
complex. Some students can write amazingly complex pieces in 1,200 words. I
redesigned my rubric to focus on the type of thinking and arguments I expected
to see, which really helped students experience more complexity.”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 107IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 107 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

108 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Having distinguished between complexity and diffi culty, we don’t think
that everything needs to be complex. Sometimes tasks should provide students
an opportunity to practice something and get better at it. Th inking of tasks
in terms of these two dimensions, diffi culty and complexity, generates a grid
with four quadrants (see Figure 3.4). We don’t think that any one of these
quadrants is better than another. For example, we think that note taking is a
low diffi culty/low complexity task and that it’s an important one for students
to learn. However, when students are working collaboratively, the task should
be suffi ciently complex to require their collective eff ort. In other words, we
look toward keeping collaborative tasks above the complexity axis, rather than
below it, because doing so provides students with a reason to interact with one
another. For instance, when studying their notes, students can pose questions
to one another, seek clarifi cation on specifi c points, and investigate information
together. Another example is in analyzing multiple documents for similar or
opposing arguments. A group of students engaged in this highly complex task
are going to rely on one another to enumerate and debate these arguments. We
use the four quadrants in Figure 3.4 to discuss with teachers how meaningful
Figure 3.4 | Complexity Versus Difficulty
More Complex
HardEasy
Less Complex
Analyzing arguments
across multiple
documents
Timed test of
familiar math facts
Studying from notes
Copying notes
in a lecture
Low difficulty
High complexity
Low difficulty
Low complexity
High difficulty
High complexity
High difficulty
Low complexity
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 108IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 108 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 109
tasks can be developed so that students are challenged by something more than
simply doing more work.
Th e importance of complexity in collaborative tasks is something we’ve
been reminded of many times in our own classrooms when we constructed
tasks that were inadvertently too easy for the group to accomplish. Instead of
meaningful interaction, we witnessed a “divide and conquer” approach, with
groups parsing out tasks to one another to be completed independently, only
to meet again just before the assignment was due to assemble the fi nal product.
Tasks that work well for small groups can often be completed in more than one
way, allowing students to use their creativity to resolve the problem. To aid in this,
teachers will intentionally move to more ambiguous and less structured tasks as
the groups show gains in their ability to work together. How ambiguous and how
unstructured is dependent on a number of factors, including the developmental
age of the students, their capacity to work together as groups, and the presence
of a learning climate that encourages risk taking and experimentation.
Collaborative learning is a sophisticated instructional behavior because it
draws on so many related components and factors. Th e complexity of the task
has implications for the component of Planning with Purpose, especially in fac-
tor 1.3, Meaningful Learning. Although students are taking the lead on these
tasks, the teacher remains continuously active in monitoring student progress,
which touches on Assessing with a System, which we discuss in depth in the next
chapter. Another aspect of this monitoring is in viewing each group’s joint atten-
tion to the tasks. A student who is sitting apart from the group with arms crossed
is signaling that he is not actively participating in the task. An eff ective teacher
knows to head over to the group to fi nd out what’s going on. In some cases, this
may have more to do with Cultivating a Learning Climate than with Instructing
with Intention. Eff ective teachers make adjustments as needed during the col-
laborative learning phase, providing scaff olds when necessary to propel a group
forward when their learning has stalled. As you can see, this adjustment signals
the use of Guided Instruction (3.2), because the teacher is now using questions,
prompts, and cues. Observers need to be sensitive to the fact that any number of
components and factors come into play during collaborative learning. Th ey must
also remember that the teacher is making myriad decisions during this phase.
Th is range can be seen in classrooms at Abraham Lincoln Elementary
School. For example, kindergarten teacher Fran Wilkie used Busy Bees regularly
in her classroom of 5-year-olds. To practice addition math facts, Ms. Wilkie
gave each child a handful of counting cubes and a sheet of paper to record
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 109IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 109 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

110 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
their answers. As she called, “Busy bees, fl y!” the children shuffl ed and buzzed
until she announced, “Busy bees, land!” Each child partnered with the adjacent
youngster and then focused on the task, which required that they collectively
count their cubes and write the result as a math expression on their papers. Ms.
Wilkie repeated this routine several times. “I like doing this because it allows
them to gain some math fl uency in partners. Th ey also get to practice some of
the social skills, like greeting each other and saying thank you.” When asked
to self-evaluate, she placed this task in the Developing range, because “it’s not
really super challenging for them, because it’s material they’re familiar with. I
need to be able to challenge them more as they work together. I think they’re
probably ready for it, but I have to think through where I want them to go next.”
However, it is important to note that Ms. Wilkie was also fostering social skills,
in keeping with her commitment to Cultivating a Learning Climate.
A few days later, Ms. Wilkie spent time in the classroom of Jen Collins,
a 1st grade colleague who rated herself at the Teaching level on the criterion
of task complexity. Ms. Wilkie decided to spend time in a 1st grade classroom
to gain a better sense of what she should prepare her students for. Th e 1st
grade teacher met with her kindergarten counterpart to discuss the types of
collaborative learning routines she was using and the tasks that she designed for
them. “I’m having success with using Fishbowl for some of the more complex
tasks, because it lets me do a bit of guided instruction before students move to
doing it collaboratively,” she said. “I will invite a few students as a small group to
the center of the room and then have everyone else sit in a larger circle outside,”
explained Ms. Collins. “As the students work on the task, I ask the others who
are observing questions like ‘Why do you think Vanessa just did that?’ or ‘What
do you thing Simon was expecting when he asked that question?’ I’m trying to
use these events to cause them to think critically about how they are interacting
and why, instead of only paying attention to the task,” she said.
Ms. Wilkie also arranged to meet with her 2nd grade colleague, Juan
Morales. He is a member of the school’s instructional leadership team (ILT)
and attends district professional development with his ILT as part of a district
initiative. Mr. Morales has presented previously at school professional learning
sessions on this topic, and Ms. Wilkie chose to meet with him because of his
primary-grade focus. Using resources from several sites, including samples
from their state’s department of education, Mr. Morales had assembled several
collaborative performance tasks for K–2 classrooms that featured a range of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 110IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 110 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 111
task complexity. Using the diagram in Figure 3.4, Mr. Morales and Ms. Wilkie
used sticky notes of task descriptions and arranged them across the grid. “I
recognized that many of the performance task examples called for more
complex thinking, especially in the number of diff erent stages of thinking my
students had to do. It also got me thinking about designing more tasks that have
more than one plausible answer, so the students can use their creativity and
see it being used by others,” Ms. Wilkie said. Mr. Morales, at the Leading level
for this criterion, made notes about Ms. Wilkie’s insights in order to share this
activity at his school’s next professional learning session.
When Ms. Wilke had a chance to talk with her team about the experiences
she had had in rethinking task complexity, another kindergarten teacher reacted
with skepticism: “Really? Th ey’re only 5 years old. School should be more about
play and socialization for them. I don’t think that there should be anything that
is complex or hard for our students at this level.” In this case, this teacher was at
the Not Yet Apparent level of growth because he wasn’t interested in considering
appropriately complex tasks for his students.
3.3c: Language support
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not provide
language
support to
students.
The teacher provides generic
written, verbal, teacher,
or peer supports for all
students, without attending
to differentiated needs.
The teacher provides
differentiated written, verbal,
teacher, or peer supports to
boost individual students’
academic language usage.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to provide differentiated
written, verbal, teacher,
or peer supports to boost
individual students’
academic language usage.
Th e third ingredient of collaborative learning is language support. All
students can benefi t from these supports, not just English language learners
and students with disabilities. Th ese supports include the following:
• Language frames
• Word banks
• Specialized and technical vocabulary lists
• Peer supports
• Print and online glossaries
• Visual dictionaries
• Graphic organizers
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 111IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 111 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

112 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Small-group communication is dependent on what is being said and how
it is being said. Language supports such as those listed can bridge the content
and the social aspects of communication. Th is support can range from using
counting chips so that small children have a tangible means to self-monitor
turn taking to using sophisticated technical vocabulary lists that include key
terminology as well as general academic words that change their meaning in
diff erent contexts and content areas.
Teachers and school leaders from other states often visit the school
where two of us work. We were especially impressed with a group that visited
classrooms in our high school to view the range of language supports we off er.
English language learners make up 32 percent of the student population, and
students with disabilities account for 15 percent. And another signifi cant
number of students are “redesignated English learners,” which means they have
largely mastered the English language but still need some supports. As you can
imagine, language supports mean a lot to us. Th e out-of-state visitors conducted
a learning walk through classrooms. In each case, they sat at tables with students
as the discussion occurred. After every third classroom, they paused to discuss
patterns of what they had seen. Using their language, each person named a “glow”
(something positive) and a “grow” (an opportunity to strengthen practice). Th eir
goal was not to evaluate our teachers but to hone their own skills in developing
post-observation questions. Th e teachers in some classrooms were at the
Developing level of growth for this criterion, while others were at the Teaching
level. Th e team identifi ed the following “glow and grow” questions for each level:
• Glow questions for teachers at the Developing level of growth: What is
an example of when a student benefi ted from a language support available to
him or her? Why do you believe it was useful? Is there another student who
might benefi t from this?
• Grow questions for teachers at the Developing level of growth: How
can you translate your success with this student into more widespread and
consistent language support for all learners?
• Glow questions for teachers at the Teaching level of growth: Choose a
student we saw today and tell me about how his or her language development
has improved over the course of the year. To what do you attribute this
growth? What will you do next for this student?
• Grow questions for teachers at the Teaching level of growth: In what
ways have your colleagues benefi ted from your language support practices?
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 112IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 112 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Instructing with Intention | 113
What are future opportunities that we could take advantage of to support your
leadership development?
Th is visit was an excellent learning experience for us, too, because their
“grow” questions focused on taking practice to the next level, not cataloging
shortcomings. Th e growth mindset of these visitors reminded us that a Leading
level of growth can be exhibited in and out of the classroom, and even in
other schools.
Importantly, the visitors said that there were no classrooms in which
language support was absent. Th ey then related a story from their own district.
Th ey reported that some teachers assigned individual and collaborative tasks
with no language support. As one of them said, “Some teachers assume that the
students will fi gure things out, either by themselves or with their peers. In those
cases, they don’t really provide any language support. Th ere are classrooms in
our high school with no word walls, no language frames, and not much teacher
or peer support.”
When asked to describe the language support they observed that was at
the Developing level, these visitors noted that every classroom had a word wall
and that students were grouped in ways that ensure peer support. Th e diff erence
they noted in the Teaching level of classrooms was not just the availability of
these types of resources but also the fact that diff erent language supports were
provided to diff erent students. As one of them said, “In one of the classrooms we
observed, students were working collaboratively, and the teacher had provided
diff erent language frames, with choices for students to use. In that same class-
room, we noticed that students had diff erent vocabulary words listed in their
notebooks, and the title of their vocabulary section was ‘Self-Collected Vocab-
ulary.’ When asked about this, the students noted that their teacher discusses
vocabulary with them and that she invites them to record the words they need to
focus on, while also reminding them that they can add words that they need to
learn from the texts they read and the conversations they have with their peers.”
Summing Up
Th e third component of the FIT Teaching Tool focuses on the instructional
processes that teachers use to facilitate student learning. Evidence for the criteria
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 113IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 113 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

114 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
in this section frequently includes classroom observations. Th ese observations
can be completed formatively by peers, coaches, or leaders. Importantly,
conversations about improvement should be based on several observations and
not only one per year, as has become all too common. Of course, if a given
criterion is missing from a specifi c observation, a growth conversation should
occur immediately.
We have organized this component around specifi c elements of the gradual
release of responsibility model. Th us, there are expectations for clear learning
intentions, as well as teacher modeling and guided instruction. In addition,
students are expected to interact with one another as they resolve problems and
consolidate their understanding with peers. We did not include the fi nal phase
of the gradual release of responsibility in this category because independent
learning is addressed in the Planning with Purpose area, specifi cally criterion
1.2a, which focuses on success criteria. In addition, independent learning is
included in the next category, Assessing with a System, as the products from
students’ learning should guide the instruction that they continue to receive.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 114IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 114 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

115
4
Assessing with a System
Assessment systems must, fi rst and foremost, place the learner at the center of
attention. By this we mean that any assessment system that values measuring
and evaluating students over informing learning and teaching is doomed to fail.
All the charts and graphs are for naught if the results are static. An old farming
maxim says that you won’t fatten cattle by simply weighing them. So it is with
assessment systems that place a premium on summative assessments while
paying lip service to formative assessment.
Formative assessment is the crux of what eff ective teachers do. Th ey don’t
just present information and hope for the best. Nor do they adopt a cavalier
attitude that “it’s not my problem if some students don’t get it, because after all,
I taught it.” (However, we suspect that many of us have been taught by a person
with this attitude at some point in our lives.) Th e ability to leverage assessment
for the purposes of learning, not just measurement, represents excellence in
the profession. And it’s not easy to do. Assessing with a system requires that
teachers use tools and techniques to support learners, monitor progress, and
inform subsequent practices. As Hattie (2012) notes, “Feedback thrives on error”
(p. 115), and we agree, because missteps are a necessary part of the learning
process. Without these missteps, and the accompanying feedback, students are
robbed of the chance to fail forward, that is, to benefi t from the learning that
comes from partial understandings, misconceptions, mistakes, and errors. Th e
following four questions are the ones we use in our own self-refl ection, whether
we are teaching 9th graders or doctoral students:
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 115IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 115 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

116 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
• Do I know what misconceptions or naïve assumptions my students
possess?
• How do I know what they understand?
• What evidence will I accept for this understanding?
• How will I use their understandings to plan future instruction? (Fisher
& Frey, 2014b, p. 14)
Interest in, and attention to, formative assessment continues to rise as
educators and administrators have come to appreciate the power of checking
for understanding for the purpose of adjusting instruction. Black and Wiliam
(1998) report that the use of formative assessment accelerates student learning
substantially. Importantly, formative assessment comprises several elements,
including conveying learning expectations to students, systematically gathering
data, monitoring progress, acting upon information to modify instruction,
providing feedback, and giving students opportunities to self-assess.
Each of these formative assessment ingredients is represented in the
Assessing with a System component, which requires that we begin with the learner,
especially in relaying learning expectations that are comprehensible, and that we
further use these expectations to help students establish goals for themselves
(4.1: Assessment to Support Learners). A second factor is Assessment to Monitor
Learning (4.2), as we check for understanding and monitor progress. Th e third
factor is Assessment to Inform Learning (4.3) through judicious use of feedback
and needs-based instruction. Th e design and implementation of systematic
assessment necessarily aff ect planning and instruction. Th roughout this chapter,
you will fi nd us referencing other parts of the tool, especially ingredients in the
components Planning with Purpose and Instructing with Intention.
Factor 4.1: Assessment to Support Learners
Anytime we venture into unfamiliar territory, we look for guideposts to reassure
us we’re on track. Consider the trail markers used to signal to hikers that they’re
headed toward particular destinations. Although it is possible for experienced
hikers to fi nd their way without them, trail markers provide them with the
reassurance they need to move forward with confi dence. On the other hand,
if hikers accidently veer off course, the trail markers reduce the time spent
wandering around and prevent them from getting hopelessly lost. In a similar
way, clearly communicated learning outcomes serve as a series of guideposts for
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 116IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 116 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 117
learners as they move through new content territory. But these guideposts (in
this case, purpose statements) are less useful if they are not well understood.
Providing purpose statements isn’t enough; we have to check in with students
to make sure they’re receiving the message we intended.
Let’s extend the trail marker analogy a bit further to describe a second
ingredient, goal setting. Most hikers, even the most inexperienced ones, have
goals in mind. For some, it is the destination (“I want to make it to Clear Lake
today”) or a time (“I want to hike for the next three hours before I stop for
lunch”). In some cases, a personal challenge is involved, such as achieving a new
personal best for distance covered. Th ose are end points, or summative goals.
But formative goals, such as reaching intermediate points along the route in a
timely fashion, are just as important. In addition, there are likely to be at least a
few conditional actions to accomplish, such as reapplying sunblock every two
hours, checking the water level in the canteen, or monitoring weather conditions.
Eff ective teachers encourage students to set formative and summative goals so
they can similarly check students’ progress toward the learning expectations
and make corrections as needed.
4.1a: Comprehensible expectations
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The learning
expectations are
not understood
by students.
The learning expectations
are communicated to
students, but the majority
of students are only
partially able to explain
or demonstrate what they
are learning, why they are
learning the content, and
how they will know they
have learned it.
The learning expectations
are clearly communicated
and understood by students
such that most randomly
selected students can
explain or demonstrate what
they are learning, why they
are learning the content,
and how they will know they
have learned it.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to convey comprehensible
learning expectations such
that most randomly selected
students can explain or
demonstrate what they
are learning, why they are
learning the content, and
how they will know they
have learned it.
Any sound assessment system is predicated on two things: (1) a clear-
eyed vision of what the expected learning outcomes will be and (2) a method
for communicating those outcomes to students in a way that is understandable
to them. Th erefore, determining whether the learning expectations in a given
lesson are comprehensible requires talking with students. Although most of
the ingredients cataloged in this tool are focused on adults, a few—including
this one—are ascertained through discussion with students. Gauging how
comprehensible the learning expectations are for the students is an important
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 117IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 117 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

118 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
touch point for determining whether the content and language purposes
designed in the planning phase (1.1d and 1.1e) are understood or need to be
revised or elaborated upon.
All three of us spend lots of time in classrooms, so we know that students
can provide great insight into what is happening. Doug talks about his evolution
as an instructional coach. Years ago, it was his practice to ask students, “What are
you doing?” He always got lots of answers from students eager to share their work,
but their insights were limited because the question was too narrow. Invariably,
students would describe the task or activity they were engaging in right then.
Over time, he changed his question to “What are you learning?” Th is question
invites an expanded response. It is fascinating to see students pause and consider
the question carefully. Doug’s interested not in how quickly they can answer but
how thoughtfully. He also likes to ask students, “Why are you learning this?”
to ascertain whether or not they understand the lesson’s relevance. Over time,
he added a third question: “How do you know when you’ve learned it?” To be
clear, Doug often needs to give students additional prompts before they reveal
these understandings, but the responses he gets tell him a lot about whether the
expectations are comprehensible to learners and help him to determine whether
the purpose has a level of specifi city that fosters self-evaluation. Students who
can explain what they are learning, why it matters, and how they measure their
own success are contributing to their developing metacognitive awareness.
Doug recently used these questions with several classes of middle school
students and recorded their responses to share in debriefi ng discussions with
their teachers. When he asked students in a social studies class what they were
learning, he heard a range of responses: seven students said they were learning
about Egypt; eight said they were learning social studies; two stated that they
were learning about the burial practices and rituals in ancient Egypt. When
asked how they would know if they had learned it, nearly every student cited the
test they would be taking soon. Th is surprised their teacher. “I write the purpose
on the board every day,” she said in dismay. Doug suggested it was possible
that the students hadn’t fully understood these posted learning expectations. “It
seems like many were using your summative assessment as a gauge, rather than
understanding how daily measures can move them forward,” he noted. Doug
and this teacher spent the next few minutes parsing the content and language
purposes the teacher had used for the lesson. Given that the students didn’t
have a way to measure their daily progress, Doug and the teacher agreed that in
this instance the teacher was at the Developing level of growth.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 118IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 118 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 119
Doug used the same technique in a 7th grade math class, asking random
students about their learning. Th is time, when asked what they were learning,
many of the student responses were more specifi c: nine students referred to using
proportions to determine populations; seven explained the formula their groups
developed to calculate the answers to the extended word problem; only one did
not have an answer. Doug also asked them, “How do you know you learned
it?” Fifteen students talked about whether they would be able to accurately
complete the group task, which was to compare international rates of soft drink
consumption; one student said that he wanted to try it out using statistics he had
recently read about participation in youth soccer across the country.
Th e math teacher was duly impressed with this last student’s ability
to extend mathematical principles beyond the classroom, and both adults
recognized this ability was quite unusual. Th e teacher was pleased that students
were using the task as a measure of their success but wanted to elevate their
thinking even further. “I love that last student’s answer about soccer; how can I
get more students to think that way?” she asked Doug. Although clearly at the
Teaching level of growth, this math teacher does what so many of us do: we
challenge ourselves to continuously improve.
Th e following week, both the social studies teacher and the math
teacher asked Doug if they could use video clips of his interviews at their next
collaborative planning team meeting. “Th e two of us have been talking about
what we’ve learned from our students, and we thought it would be great to
refl ect on these together. We’re both next on the list for the sharing-student-
work protocol our PLC uses, and we fi gured these would be great examples
and nonexamples,” said the social studies teacher. Although both had initially
exhibited skills elsewhere on the scale, in this instance they were demonstrating
a Leading level of growth by using their insights to benefi t their colleagues.
4.1b: Goal-setting opportunities
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not provide
goal-setting
opportunities to
students.
The teacher provides goal-
setting opportunities but
only prompts students to
use them summatively (end
of project or assignment),
thus limiting students’
ability to measure progress
formatively.
The teacher provides clear
and focused opportunities
for students to set and
gauge their progress toward
achievement of goals related
to learning and mastery.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
provide clear and focused
opportunities for students to
set and gauge their progress
toward achievement of goals
related to learning and
mastery.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 119IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 119 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

120 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
A hefty body of research links student goal setting to achievement (see
Huang, 2012, for a meta-analysis), but an important point is that not all goals
work equally well. For example, students who use approach goals (“I will
complete 9 of 10 quadratic equations correctly today”) achieve at higher levels
than those who use avoidance goals (“I will not fail today’s math quiz”). And
goal setting is not just a matter of achievement; it is also linked to motivation.
Learners who work toward something positive rather than avoid something
negative are found to have a higher sense of competency and show more
persistence (Elliot, 1999). A learner of any age who establishes goals is able to
direct cognitive resources toward achieving the goal while avoiding distractions
that can undermine eff ort. However, goals that focus solely on more distant
outcomes, such as earning an A on an end-of-unit test, are likely to backfi re
early on. “When assigning new or complex tasks in a classroom context, it
might work best to also provide students with initial learning goals so that
they can focus on discovering eff ective strategies. Once they know what to
do, setting performance goals can be eff ective” (Morisano & Locke, 2013,
p. 45). Eff ective teachers leverage student goal setting as a means for propelling
students forward in their learning each day, as well as at the end of a unit of
instruction. Th is approach parallels sound assessment practices for teachers, in
that students are able to draw on their progress toward goals both formatively
and summatively.
Th e 3rd grade team at Hartford Elementary formed a professional learning
community to support their collective eff orts in Assessing with a System.
During one meeting, they turned their attention to goal-setting opportunities
for students. Th e meeting began with a protocol often used at this school.
After each teacher writes for 10 minutes in response to a question or prompt,
they engage in successive rounds of structured discussion for each member,
following these steps:
1. Th e focus teacher reads his or her writing.
2. Other members of the team ask clarifying questions to obtain
additional information but do not off er comment at this time.
3. Th e group engages in discussion using four questions: What was
your intention? How would students describe your intention? What was your
evidence that your intention was successful? Looking back, what, if anything,
would you have done diff erently?
4. Each member, in turn, is the focus teacher, and the process is repeated.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 120IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 120 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 121
5. After all the rounds are complete, the group engages in a discussion
about the topic and self-evaluates using an appropriate rubric.
6. Th e last fi ve minutes of the meeting are dedicated to writing about
action steps for deepening instructional practice.
Myra Santiago had been selected by the group to facilitate this meeting.
Each member of the grade-level team took a turn at facilitation in order to
build their collective capacity as teacher-leaders. “Our principal reminds
us that there’s a leader in every seat,” said Ms. Santiago. Before this meeting,
she had developed the following writing prompt to start the meeting: Write
about a time this year when your students set goals for themselves. How did
you make this happen? In what ways did students use the goals? How did you
use the goals? After Ms. Santiago and the other teachers completed the writing
portion of the meeting, John Desiderio volunteered to go fi rst. After he read
his response to the group and answered clarifying questions, the group used
the four questions to structure the discussion. Mr. Desiderio had described the
goal-setting activity he did with his students in September—“What I want to be
able to do by May”—and remarked that his intention was for them to return to
it a few times a month to see how they were progressing. However, he said that
lately he had fallen behind and that his students had only checked in with their
goals once in the past six weeks. “I’d have to say that, by now, my students are
thinking that it was just an activity that has fi zzled out,” he off ered. “I can’t say
that the goals they wrote for themselves have been a constant.”
Ms. Santiago elected to go next. She, too, read her writing and answered
the group’s clarifying questions. She explained that her students have a goals
notebook in their desk, and she guides them in each lesson to record a learning
goal that she has crafted for them and write a personal goal for themselves.
In response to the question about evidence of success, she explained that she
uses these written lesson goals in impromptu conversations with individual
students. “I’ll give an example from earlier today. Trevor was showing signs
of being confused, so I went to him and asked him some questions. I had him
take his goals notebook out and asked him to read his ‘I can’ statement: ‘I can
describe what the main character does and why he or she does it.’ I spent a few
minutes with him breaking down this goal into examples from the book he was
reading. Th at was enough to get him going again,” she said.
Next, Lani O’Hearn read her writing, which explained that she hadn’t done
any goal setting with students and needed to know more about it. She admitted
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 121IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 121 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

122 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
that although she had often read about the importance of goal setting in her
decade-long teaching career, she just didn’t do it. “I guess what’s embarrassing is
that I expect that goal setting is something that gets talked about in professional
development, but I haven’t actually done it. I’ll cut to the chase on our questions,”
she said. “What I’ll do diff erently is that I’ll start setting goals with my kids. I’m
just not sure I know how.” Ms. O’Hearn is an example of the knowing-doing
gap, possessing a high level of knowledge but an absence of application.
Each member of the grade-level team continued in similar fashion and
then turned their attention to the FIT Teaching Tool. Based on the criteria, Mr.
Desiderio placed himself at the Developing growth level, noting that he was
using student goals infrequently, diminishing his students’ ability to formatively
assess their progress. “You’ve given me some good ideas, Myra,” he said. Ms.
Santiago, on the other hand, placed herself at the Teaching level, as she was
regularly using student goals both formatively and summatively. Ms. O’Hearn
put herself at the Not Yet Apparent level, as she had not yet written goals with
students. When writing her action plan, she listed meeting with Myra Santiago
to discuss student goal setting in more detail. She arranged to meet Ms. Santiago
for lunch later in the week to get started. Now exhibiting a Leading level of
growth, Ms. Santiago assembled some materials and resources after the PLC
meeting that she would share with her colleague during their lunch.
Factor 4.2: Assessment to Monitor Learning
Imagine a trip with no midcourse corrections. Even if you have traveled the
same route hundreds of times, you look for landmarks along the way, drawing
reassurance that your journey is leading you closer to your destination. If a road
is impassable, you take another route that will still get you to your intended
destination, even if the midcourse correction meant you’d need to travel a bit
longer than originally planned. Th e expected time for the journey is important,
but it’s not the sole consideration. A 20-minute journey isn’t a guarantee that
you’ll end up where you wanted to. Yet, as Wiliam (2006) points out, too often
we teach in exactly this way. You wouldn’t be satisfi ed with a taxi driver who
drove for 20 minutes and then told you to get out, even though the stopping
point wasn’t where you wanted to go. It wouldn’t help matters if the taxi driver
explained that he had another fare and needed to move on to the next job.
But isn’t this exactly what happens to many students? Teachers often hold
time as the constant and allow learning to vary among students. At the end of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 122IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 122 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 123
the lesson, some students master the content; others don’t. Without attention
to monitoring learning, teachers aren’t capable of adapting to ensure that the
learning is held constant and time is the variable (Fisher & Frey, 2010a). In the
previous section, we discussed the importance of conveying expectations and
providing opportunities for students to self-assess. In this section, we spotlight
two ingredients: systematically gathering data through checks for understanding
and error analysis to understand what adaptations need to happen next. Taken
together, these practices make it possible to monitor learning progress so that
reteaching can occur when needed. Th ese midcourse corrections are essential
for making necessary adaptations that ensure that the learning, not the time, is
held constant.
4.2a: Checks for understanding
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not check for
understanding.
The teacher sporadically
checks for understanding
throughout the lesson,
using a limited repertoire
of techniques to do so.
Opportunities to check for
understanding are often
overlooked, and the teacher
relies primarily on anecdotal
information about student
progress.
The teacher systematically
checks for student
understanding throughout
the lesson, using a variety
of techniques, which may
include the following:
• Oral language
(questioning, retelling,
student conversation)
• Student writing
• Student projects/
performances
• Tests/quizzes/common
assessments
• Student self-assessment
The teacher uses these
checks for understanding
to gauge progress of
individuals and groups.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to systematically check for
student understanding
throughout the lesson using
a variety of techniques,
which may include the
following:
• Oral language
(questioning, retelling,
student conversation)
• Student writing
• Student projects/
performances
• Tests/quizzes/common
assessments
• Student self-assessment
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to use these checks for
understanding to gauge
progress of individuals
and groups.
We describe checking for understanding as an ongoing series of events a
teacher plans and implements to gauge progress in the moment. Techniques
for checking for understanding run the gamut from listening to students’ oral
language as they converse, retell, and respond to questions to examining their
written work, projects, and performances. Homework can also be used to check
for understanding, so long as students have had opportunities to learn the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 123IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 123 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

124 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
content before they are asked to apply their knowledge independently. When
homework does not count for a grade and students know that their teachers use
the data formatively, they are more likely to show their actual understanding
of the content. In contrast, when homework is counted for a grade, students
often seek help from others, thus skewing the data and preventing teachers
from taking action on the patterns of errors they see (or don’t see).
However, we are questioned most often about the use of quizzes to check
for understanding. Th is technique of using frequent, low-stakes assessments to
accelerate learning is perhaps the most underused. We draw on the research
about washback, the term used to describe the positive and negative eff ects of
testing on learning. Roediger (2014) calls positive washback retrieval-enhanced
learning, because these low-stakes quizzes can solidify new knowledge and
promote transfer to new situations in ways that simply rereading cannot (transfer
goals were discussed in Planning with Purpose 1.1a). A prime example of this
is audience-response systems (clickers), an effi cient means of assessing student
understanding. Short quizzes, whether gathered digitally or through traditional
paper-and-pencil tasks, accomplish two things at once, as they contribute to
student learning while providing a means to check understanding. Figure 4.1
contains a comprehensive list of techniques for checking for understanding,
including opportunities for using them.
“I have a test for them. I guess I don’t see the problem,” special education
teacher Whitney Davidson said to her coteacher, Violet Bancroft. Th e two were
discussing lessons for the following week. At the Not Yet Apparent level of
growth, Ms. Davidson understood the importance of a summative assessment,
but she had not identifi ed ways that she would be checking for understanding
throughout the unit. Although Ms. Bancroft was pleased that they had a
summative assessment, she knew from experience that it wouldn’t be suffi cient
to lead learning.
“How will you know they’re learning, and more important, when they’re
not learning?” asked Ms. Bancroft. “I’ll give you one simple example,” she
continued. “Remember today when I had the students write answers to the
math problems we were doing on the small whiteboards? I did that not just
to keep them engaged but also because it gave me information about when
I could move to the next concept. Th ey were doing fi ne when I asked them
to write the reciprocal of the whole numbers. But when I saw that several of
them were having trouble writing the absolute value of the number, do you
remember what I did?” Th e special education teacher nodded, stating that her
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 124IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 124 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 125
Figure 4.1 | Techniques for Checking for Understanding
Using Oral Language to Check for Understanding
Technique Description How I Can Use It
Accountable
Talk
Provides a framework for and expectations
of communication during academic
discussions
To determine the next steps for instruction
Noticing
Nonverbal
Clues
Facial expressions and body language
can provide clues to students’ level of
understanding
To check for understanding by noticing
students’ confused, dazed, or bored
expressions
Value Lineups Students evaluate a statement and line
up according to the level of agreement or
disagreement; provides opportunity to
express own opinion and listen to differing
opinions
To determine student knowledge,
preconceived ideas, and gaps in
information
Retellings Students retell or summarize what they
understand about text
To check for understanding after
independent, small-group, or whole-group
reading
Think-Pair-
Share
Cooperative discussion activity in which
students discuss responses with a partner
before sharing with the class
To increase student participation and to
improve quality of responses
Misconception
Analysis
Provides opportunities for students
to discuss and analyze any
misunderstandings they may have
To help students explore ideas, correct or
incorrect, and arrive at correct assumptions
on their own through small-group
discussions
Whip Around Closure activity in which teacher poses
a question, students write three items,
students read one item, everybody
checks item off if they have it on their list;
continues until everyone has shared
To check the level of understanding after
a lesson; to determine if reteaching is
necessary
Using Questioning to Check for Understanding
Strategy Description How I Can Use It
Constructing
Effective
Questions
Teacher asks questions to check for
understanding and scaffolds when
necessary with follow-up questions that
evoke higher critical thinking
To determine next steps and depth of
understanding
Providing
Nonverbal
Support
Nonverbal cues that can encourage
participation and support communication
To model good listening skills, to show
respect for the speaker, to give the teacher
an opportunity to analyze responses
(continued)
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 125IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 125 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

126 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Using Questioning to Check for Understanding
Strategy Description How I Can Use It
Developing
Authentic
Questions
Teacher develops questions that address all
levels of Bloom’s taxonomy to ensure that
questions ultimately engage creative and
critical thinking
To provide opportunities for students
to think and the teacher to check for
understanding
Response Cards Students hold up a card, board, or other
item that shows response to a question
posed by the teacher as a whole-group
activity
To check understanding and determine
who “gets” it
Hand Signals Students use pretaught hand signals to
represent levels of understanding
To check understanding when teaching
a new concept; to assess from beginning
to end to determine when reteaching is
necessary
Audience-
Response
Systems
Students respond to a multiple-choice
question with a remote device that records
and displays answers
To assess understanding after a concept
has been taught; to help to determine
what to review
ReQuest Reciprocal questioning; teacher and
students take turns questioning each other
after reading a segment of text; students
learn from teacher modeling
To help students comprehend diffi cult text,
have them work in pairs and question each
other as they read
Socratic
Seminar
Questions and answers are posed within a
group setting to examine opinions or ideas
logically
To comprehend complex issues in a
diffi cult text, teacher poses an opening
question for discussion
Using Writing to Check for Understanding
Strategy Description How I Can Use It
Interactive
Writing
Students participate in the writing process
in small- or whole-group settings where
the writing is shared by teacher and
student
To assess students’ knowledge and
understanding of grammar, language
structure, writing conventions, spelling,
etc.
Read, Write,
Pair, Share
Students read text, write a response to
their reading, and partner up and share
before fi nally sharing their ideas with the
group as a whole
To determine what students already know;
listening to conversations becomes a
window to student thinking
Summary
Writing
Students write a summary of what they
have read, viewed, or discussed
To help understand how students organize
and condense knowledge
Figure 4.1 | Techniques for Checking for Understanding (continued)
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 126IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 126 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 127
Using Writing to Check for Understanding
Strategy Description How I Can Use It
RAFT Writing prompts designed to help students
gear their writing to different perspectives
and audiences
To teach perspective in writing; to check for
understanding
Using Projects and Performances to Check for Understanding
Strategy Description How I Can Use It
Readers’
Theater
A reading activity, much like a scripted play
without the props, costumes, or sets, in
which students read directly from a script
to tell a story
To improve reading fl uency, vocabulary
knowledge, and comprehension
Multimedia
Presentations
Students use technology to create
presentations with graphics, video,
animation, and text to show learning
To check for depth of understanding as a
culminating project for a unit of study
Electronic and
Paper Portfolios
A collection of work samples refl ective of a
student’s best work throughout the year;
samples should exemplify the cognitive
processes of learning
To give next year’s teacher a more in-depth
view of students’ performance levels
Graphic
Organizers
A tool used to organize information
or ideas from text to improve reading
comprehension
To understand main idea and details
in text; to assist students in prewriting
activities
Inspiration® Digital graphic organizer that uses
graphics, text, and other visual tools
To provide an alternative to a traditional
graphic organizer; for students who
struggle with reading or who have
disabilities
Foldables™ Three-dimensional graphic organizers;
provide a kinesthetic element and
alternative to worksheets
To compare and contrast two ideas, objects,
or concepts
Dioramas Miniature models of a scene that display a
concept, idea, or story
To engage students while checking for
understanding; can be used in most
content areas
Public
Performances
Opportunities to help gauge students’
understanding and show what they have
learned
To help students become comfortable with
their public speaking while organizing the
important ideas in a content unit of study
Source: Angela Fisher, Darnall Charter School, San Diego, CA. Used with permission.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 127IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 127 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

128 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
coteacher called the struggling students into a “huddle” (her term for times
during the lesson when she stops to do some short reteaching) while directing
the rest of the class to go into “playbook mode” to review their notes and add an
explanation about the diff erences between the two concepts. In a few minutes,
the students in the huddle returned to their desks and provided an explanation
to their table partners.
Ms. Bancroft then asked everyone to check their written explanations and
make any corrections needed. When the lesson ended 15 minutes later, she
asked all the students to stack their math notebooks at the end of the table,
opened to the page where the explanation was written. Th e coteachers read
and sorted them into correct, partial, and incorrect answers so that they could
reteach as needed the following day (see the next section, on error analysis,
for further information). Ms. Bancroft’s example of using response boards, oral
language of students, and written explanations was evidence of her Teaching
level of growth.
After further discussion, Ms. Bancroft had an idea that would demonstrate
her frequent checks for understanding. Th e following day, she fi lmed herself
teaching a 15-minute segment of a lesson. During lunch, Ms. Bancroft and Ms.
Davidson watched the video on Ms. Bancroft’s phone. Each time Ms. Bancroft
checked for understanding, whether through questioning, written responses,
or a performance task, she paused the video and did an impromptu think-aloud
about her decision-making processes. By the end of the exercise, Ms. Davidson
had gained new insight not just into techniques for checking for understanding
but also into the critical role they play in shedding light on progress toward the
established purpose. Ms. Bancroft’s coaching conversation with her coteacher
exemplifi ed a professional at the Leading level of growth.
Ms. Davidson adjusted her unit of instruction to include formative
assessment. Like Ms. Bancroft, she used response boards and written
explanations in her small-group lessons. However, when debriefi ng with her
coteacher, she more often cited individual student examples—mostly oral
responses to questions—to draw conclusions about the understanding of
the class. Ms. Bancroft asked probing questions to help her colleague see the
diff erence between drawing on systematically collected data and using anecdotal
incidences to make determinations. “It’s a common error of judgment that
teachers make when they’re new to the classroom,” Ms. Bancroft explained later.
Although her coteacher could be said to be at the Developing level because she
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 128IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 128 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 129
did plan to check for understanding, she was still overgeneralizing knowledge
of the group by extrapolating from isolated sources.
4.2b: Error analysis
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not analyze
student errors.
The teacher analyzes student
errors, misconceptions, and
miscues but does not link
these fi ndings to feedback
or future instruction.
The teacher strategically
analyzes student errors,
misconceptions, and
miscues to provide more
accurate and specifi c
feedback and future
instruction to students.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
strategically analyze student
errors, misconceptions,
and miscues to provide
more accurate and specifi c
feedback and future
instruction to students.
Learners make mistakes and errors all the time, but do you know the
diff erence between the two? Th e answer lies in the response you get from
the student. It is a mistake when an incorrect response is pointed out and the
learner immediately knows what to do to fi x it. For example, you point out a
misspelling in an essay and the student recognizes it and immediately corrects
it. On the other hand, it is an error when the student doesn’t know what he
should do next. In this case, the same student uses the word seize instead of
cease and when this is pointed out, isn’t able to discern the diff erent meanings.
When the response is an error such as this, more instruction is in order. When
it is a mistake, the student just needs some time to fi x it. Th e problem is that
you won’t know if the student has made a mistake or an error until you ask.
More to the point, if you don’t have a means for capturing and coding your
fi ndings, you will compromise your ability to bring a level of precision into your
teaching practice.
Errors fall into four broad categories that further inform the subsequent
instruction needed. Th e fi rst is a factual error, which occurs more frequently
when the student is at the beginning stages of learning new material. A second
type is the procedural error, which happens when the student applies the factual
information incorrectly. As an example, an elementary science student may
confuse or misuse the terms herbivore, carnivore, and omnivore in a unit about
food webs, which is a factual error. Th e student makes a procedural error when
he incorrectly maps relationships between producers and decomposers in the
food web. A third type, the transformational error, happens when students
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 129IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 129 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

130 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
overgeneralize new knowledge in an attempt to apply it to situations where it
is not valid or fail to apply the information when it is instructive. For instance,
later in the unit the student understands that the food web shows how energy
fl ows through an ecosystem but makes a transformational error when he
does not apply this knowledge in the next physical science unit about energy.
Th e fourth type, the misconception, is the most stubborn to unearth, because
learners tend to selectively choose to attend to new knowledge in a way that
supports existing misconceptions. Th erefore, a student’s study of food webs is
compromised by an existing misconception that all carnivores are large and
fi erce and all herbivores are small and meek.
Eff ective teachers actively seek to gather information about mistakes and
errors and analyze them to make decisions about future instruction. Many
primary reading teachers routinely use running records to capture the oral
reading behaviors of emergent readers (Clay, 2000). First grade teacher Melissa
Hunter collected running records for each student every six weeks to make
decisions about reading instruction. Ms. Hunter listened to a student as he read
new text aloud, using a prescribed coding system to identify errors and self-
corrections. “It’s important that I capture those self-corrections, because it tells
me when a child has made a mistake and was able to fi x it. It lets me know he’s
monitoring his own reading,” said Ms. Hunter. Early in her career, she collected
running records and scored them, but she didn’t use them to plan future
instruction. “In retrospect, I was at the Developing [growth] level because I was
using them mostly to measure progress. It took me a few years and some great
guidance from the Reading Recovery teacher at our school to help me re-form
groups and advance them to the next reading level,” she said. “For a long time, I
didn’t realize that I wasn’t moving them forward as quickly as I should have. My
practice has changed over the last few years, and I feel I’m now at the Teaching
level of growth.”
Ninth grade English teacher Lance Kennedy, who teaches in the same
district as Ms. Hunter, coded and analyzed his students’ errors diff erently. “Our
district has remained committed to formative assessment procedures for several
years, and I think we’re getting really good at this,” he said. Th e high school
English teachers in his district developed error analysis sheets to refl ect major
errors students make. “Th ese error-coding sheets help us to make decisions
about who needs some reteaching and in what form,” Mr. Kennedy said. He
took out a current coding sheet he was using as he read draft argumentative
essays his students were developing (see Figure 4.2). “As I read them, I write
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 130IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 130 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 131
their initials down when I see that they’re making certain kinds of errors. I
can fi gure out what small groups to pull for some needs-based instruction.” As
he scanned down the error sheet, he pointed to the number of organizational
errors being made in his fourth-period class. “Th at’s going to be a whole-group
Figure 4.2 | Error-Coding Form for High School Writing
Note: For each period, students are indicated by their initials. In Column 1, (F) = factual error, (P) = procedural
error, and (T) = transformational error.
Error Period 1 Period 3 Period 4 Period 6
Makes errors
in vocabulary
words or phrases,
fi gurative
language, or
idioms. (F)
PB, KF ED, HP, MS, AJ RR, DG, DD, EH SP, KD, KL, CE,
SD, JL
Uses inaccurate
or incomplete
information. (F)
PB, KF, DR, SP OS, DT, HP SA, HB, LC, CB DB, CC
Sentences
contain dangling
modifi ers. (P)
HY, KO, LM RE, WW, BV, ES GT PE, AL, DT, PH, LW
Style or tone is
not consistent
throughout. (T)
PB LE, KS, NR, JH TR, WJ, DG, DD,
SP
MO, DS, GL, MA,
RA
Makes errors in
using parallel
structures. (T)
LU, DR SI, SJ, BE, HP MS, AP, CR, DD, JI,
RR, LC
DB, CC
Evidence cited
does not support
claims. (T)
SS, AC, KF ER, WQ, FG, ES, LE AP, WJ, JI, PL KD, JR, BA, CL, BB
Organizational
errors interfere
with the fl ow of
reasoning. (T)
YC, PB, FR, GS,
IN, VE
OS, WQ MS, GT, HB, LC,
AP, WJ, HH, WE,
PL, CR, DD, SA, TR,
JI, ST, AE, FR, RR,
EH, CB, SZ, PL, DE,
DG, EH
JP, MO, GL, PH
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 131IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 131 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

132 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
lesson. But the good thing that comes out of my coding these is that I know I
only need to do that in fourth period, not all day long.” At the Teaching level, Mr.
Kennedy is analyzing errors to make instructional decisions.
Zara Ali was delighted to hear the results of the conversations with Ms.
Hunter and Mr. Kennedy. She is a 6th grade science teacher at one of the
district’s middle schools and a member of the district’s formative assessment
work group. For two years, she and the work group designed a series of
professional learning sessions, webinars, and short online coaching videos
about formative assessment. In addition, she facilitated meetings with district
science teachers to develop similar error-coding forms in their content areas.
“Putting the forms together really got all of us talking about the essential
errors we needed to watch for. Not the minutia, but the big stuff ,” said Ms.
Ali. “It’s also helped us clarify success criteria for each unit. We don’t want to
drown in all the data. But we do need to keep our message clear to students
about setting academic goals and gauging their success. Th is project has been
a win-win for us.” At the Leading level of growth, Ms. Ali was helping her
colleagues across the district analyze errors, leading to better learning for
many students.
Factor 4.3: Assessment to Inform Learning
Th e previous two factors—Assessment to Support Learners and Assessment to
Monitor Learning—lead to the third, and culminating, factor: Assessment to
Inform Learning. A formative assessment system must close the loop by provid-
ing students with the information they need to move forward. Th is is accom-
plished through various feedback mechanisms that are matched to reduce the
distance between the learning goals and students’ current level of understanding
(Sadler, 1989). Learning intentions play a critical role in this process, as teach-
ers use them to inform the feedback they off er to students. To maximize its
impact on learning, the feedback must allow learners to take action by shining
a light on a cognitive path they can take. Th roughout the process, the teacher is
making decisions about the next instructional steps that need to occur and, in
doing so, analyzing errors to detect patterns. Th e error analysis profi led in the
previous section results in further needs-based instruction that is targeted to
the right learners at the right time.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 132IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 132 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 133
4.3a: Types of feedback
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not provide
different types of
feedback.
The teacher provides
feedback about the task,
about the processes of
the task, and about self-
regulation, but these
feedback offerings may
not be scaled to match the
learning progress of the
student. The teacher dilutes
the feedback with praise.
The teacher selects the type
of feedback most conducive
to providing students with a
clear understanding of how
they are doing relative to
the learning goal, providing
progressive feedback
• about the task,
• about processing of the
task, and
• about self-regulation.
The teacher keeps praise
separate from feedback to
increase its effectiveness.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
select the type of feedback
most conducive to providing
students with a clear
understanding of how they
are doing relative to the
learning goal, providing
progressive feedback
• about the task,
• about processing of the
task, and
• about self-regulation.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
keep praise separate from
feedback to increase its
effectiveness.
Feedback is the engine of a formative assessment system because it pro-
pels learners forward. A student may have stalled and may not be sure how to
get back on the road, or she may be pumping the brakes because she doubts
whether her path is the correct one. Th ese are the precise moments when feed-
back from the teacher can get students under way again. However, feedback is
more eff ective when it aligns with where the learner is, cognitively and meta-
cognitively. Hattie (2012) has devoted his career to understanding the relation-
ship between teacher behaviors and their relative impact on student learning,
and he has reported that feedback is among the most useful, at a .79 eff ect size.
(Eff ect size can be thought of as “the amount of bang for your buck.” Eff ect sizes
above .40 are considered to be worthy of attention.) He further describes three
types of feedback, each of which is more or less eff ective depending on where
the student is in the learning process.
Feedback about the task is the most common type off ered and is sometimes
described as corrective feedback. Th e attention is on the task at hand and is
focused on accuracy and completeness. Task-centered feedback is most useful
when the learner is new to the content (Heubusch & Lloyd, 1998, as cited in
Hattie, 2012). For example, a world history teacher says, “Th is portion of the
essay is incomplete because you don’t discuss his purpose or his domestic and
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 133IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 133 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

134 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
international audiences. Reread the section on Stalin’s Five-Year Plan speech
and then read your answer again to add these details.”
Feedback about the process focuses attention on the critical thinking that
is needed in the task. Th is type of feedback is best suited for learners who are
deepening their learning after they have acquired the initial knowledge needed.
Th e same world history teacher might return to the same student later and say,
“You’ve added the information about Stalin’s purpose and audiences, which will
help you in addressing the fi rst part of the analysis. And the next part asks you
to compare it to Mao’s Great Leap Forward plan. How will you compare the
two? You could list similarities and diff erences in a Venn diagram to organize
your thinking.”
Feedback on self-regulation is delivered to foster a student’s ability to self-
evaluate and make decisions for next steps, thus encouraging ownership. Th is
type of feedback is often delivered as a thought-provoking question. Th e same
world history teacher could later say, “I can see how you have strengthened your
essay by expanding on Stalin’s and Mao’s ideas. What I don’t see yet is evidence
to support your argument. Why would that improve your essay, and how can
you go about accomplishing that? I’ll check in with you in a few minutes so we
can discuss your plan.”
Hattie describes a fourth type of feedback, one that undermines the
eff ectiveness of the fi rst three. Feedback about the self as a person, commonly
known as general praise, actually mutes the feedback when it is combined
with the others. In other words, “You’re a great listener!” diverts attention
away from the rest of the feedback (“You developed a plan for revising your
essay that is clear”). Although praise is of great value in building relationships
between teachers and students, it is better when used to off er comfort and
encouragement, rather than embedded within feedback. Th is is diffi cult to do,
as we tend to use praise to soften the blow we fear our corrective feedback will
have on our students. But feedback about tasks, processes, and self-regulation
doesn’t have a negative eff ect on learning simply because we are pointing out
an error. Th is is where student-developed learning goals are of particular use.
Rather than saying, “Th ese four problems are wrong, but I like how hard you’re
trying,” a teacher can say, “You set a goal today of getting at least 18 of the 20
math problems correct. You’ve got 16 of them correctly fi nished so far. Choose
two others to focus on, and we’ll dig into them together.” In the fi rst example,
the student’s learning is no further advanced after the interaction with his
teacher. In the second, he is back at work. It is essential to curb our reluctance
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 134IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 134 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 135
to deliver “bad news” and instead focus on delivering feedback that propels
learning forward.
Hartford Unifi ed School District has a systemwide focus on Assessing
with a System. While the 3rd grade collaborative planning team at Hartford
Elementary was examining goal-setting opportunities (4.1b), the science
department team at Westbank High School focused their professional learning
on delivering feedback more eff ectively and in ways that corresponded to the
students’ learning progression. Th e team rotated the responsibility of leading
the learning, and this time classroom teacher Delia Ventura was doing so. “I’ve
taught science for six years, and I’m interested in refi ning my teaching practice,”
she said. Th irty minutes of their twice-a-month meetings were dedicated to
professional learning. Ms. Ventura compiled several professional readings and
found an archived webinar on feedback, and she built a module on her school’s
learning management system to house these resources. Near the end of the
second meeting, the members decided to make audio recordings with their
smartphones to capture examples of feedback in each of the three categories.
Each member posted these to the LMS, and the team listened to and discussed
each of them together at the next meeting.
Physics teacher Robin Gardiner played each of her three audio recordings
and explained her thinking about why she believed her feedback examples were
aligned to student learning. After extended discussion and several playbacks,
the team concurred that each was a solid example of the three types (task,
process, and self-regulation). Th ey pressed Ms. Gardiner to elaborate on the
evidence she used to match the feedback type to the learners’ progressions.
She explained:
In the fi rst one, when I was giving feedback about the task, I was giving
it to the whole class. Th ey were just beginning to learn about waves, and
as you know, there’s lots of technical vocabulary. Th ey were still getting
their heads around the diff erence between phase velocity and group
velocity, so I set up a whole-class activity where they saw examples of
both and then used response cards to show which type it was. I gave
them corrective feedback about their answers and explained why it was
either one or the other.
Ms. Ventura shared her audio recordings as well but identifi ed herself
as being at the Developing level after discussion with her team. She was using
types of feedback to mirror her students’ learning, but her team helped her
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 135IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 135 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

136 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
realize that she was using praise in ways that detracted from the feedback
itself. After playing back her recordings, she recognized that in two of the three
samples she had couched her feedback “inside a praise sandwich,” as she later
said. “I told [Jamison] that he did ‘great work’ when he and I both knew that it
wasn’t. I talked about his goal for the lesson—‘to graph the data from the lab
accurately’—and there were three incorrectly plotted data points. No wonder
he looked at me so suspiciously.”
Ms. Gardiner was working at the Leading level of growth because she was
applying her knowledge to build the capacity of her colleagues to use feedback
more eff ectively. Ms. Gardiner supported her team’s learning by using her own
examples to engage in discussion about her decision-making processes regarding
feedback. Although it was Ms. Ventura who facilitated the team’s professional
learning, her own practice was at the Developing level. All the members of the
science team made plans to visit each other’s classrooms and use a tally sheet to
take a 15-minute data-collection sample for one another so they could discuss
the results again during lunch. During the following week, each pairing used
these conversations to attune their practices. “I’m pretty fortunate to work with
these people,” Ms. Ventura commented.
4.3b: Usefulness of feedback
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher does
not provide
useful feedback.
The teacher provides
students with feedback
that is diminished in its
effectiveness because
it is delayed, vague,
incomprehensible to the
learner, or does not allow for
the learner to take action.
The teacher successfully
provides students with
feedback that is timely,
specifi c, understandable,
and actionable.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability
to provide students with
feedback that is timely,
specifi c, understandable,
and actionable.
At one time or another, we have all found ourselves on the losing end of
feedback. Worse, much of that feedback occurred in school. You may have had
graded work returned to you after the semester or course was over. Or perhaps
the feedback you got was vague and incomprehensible. Nancy recalls getting
essays returned in English with single words such as “awkward” written in the
margins. Or worse, a professor in Stefani’s graduate-degree program wrote
“hmmm” in the margins of her essays. What did that even mean? But perhaps
the worst is when there’s no ability to act upon the feedback. Although it is
popular to say, “Failure is not an option,” in fact, it often is. When teachers save
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 136IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 136 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 137
up their best (or only) feedback for summative assessments and do not allow
for further revisions or retakes, the feedback is wasted (as in “wastebasket,”
because that’s where you’re likely to fi nd many of those papers you labored over
all weekend), and some students may fail. Feedback gets stale pretty quickly,
and Wiggins (1998) reminds us that, to survive its short shelf life, feedback
should be timely, specifi c, understandable to the learner, and actionable.
Middle school principal Dayea Guinto was surveying teachers about
the usefulness of their feedback. Results of a staff survey about professional
development needs indicated that many would like more training on feedback,
so she decided to meet with her school’s instructional leadership team to
discuss their own practices in more detail. Ms. Guinto used the factors and
ingredients of Assessing with a System to foster conversation. Among the fi ve
participants was Paul Jackson, a 7th grade mathematics teacher. Although he
agreed with the four elements that make feedback useful, he admitted that
many were a struggle to consistently achieve. “I get the results of their quizzes
right back to them,” he said. “I’m proud that I have a 48-hour turnaround policy,
and my [students] know it and expect it. I schedule time into my calendar for
each test so that I can do that,” he said. “But I don’t have them do it again,
like to correct their mistakes. When the quiz is done, I’m done,” Mr. Jackson
continued. His description of his practice puts him at the Developing growth
level for this criterion.
“But how do you know that those who didn’t ‘get it’ will eventually get it?”
asked ILT member Ofelia del Rosario. Mr. Jackson replied that he could tell by
how each student did on the end-of-unit test. “But isn’t that too late?” Ms. del
Rosario pressed. Th e team debated the merits of providing students with the
ability to retake quizzes and tests. Ms. del Rosario explained how 8th grade
students in her pre-algebra class took short quizzes each day on her school’s
learning management system. “Th ree questions, tops,” she said, “but I have
them set as adaptive items, so that when they get an answer wrong there’s a
feedback statement I’ve written that pops up. Th e system tracks correct and
incorrect responses, and the ones a student gets wrong come back again on
another day. I can show all of you how to do it,” she off ered, demonstrating a
Leading level of growth. Th e principal made a note to herself about this feature
on the LMS, one she herself was not aware of, as a possible idea to be featured
at the next professional learning session.
ILT member Ed Martinelli suggested that student perspectives might be
needed to gauge the quality of feedback and volunteered to fi nd out from his
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 137IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 137 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

138 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
own students. Because students in his 6th grade English class were working
on extemporaneous speaking skills, he decided to include “feedback on the
feedback.” Each day, four students spoke about the day’s debatable topic (e.g.,
Should parents limit screen time for their children? Are single-gender schools
better for middle school students?) after reading about the pros and cons and
discussing it with their table mates. Mr. Martinelli’s written feedback sheet for
each speaker included information about the content, delivery, organization,
and eff ectiveness of the persuasion. He added the following item:
Dear Student,
I am working on improving my skills as a teacher. Can you please rate the
quality of the feedback I have given you on a scale of 1 (least eff ective)
to 5 (most eff ective)? Please let me know the following: (1) Did you
receive this written feedback in a timely way? (2) Did you understand
the feedback you received? (3) Was the feedback specifi c and detailed?
(4) Did the feedback include next steps for improvement? Please include
any suggestions for me to give you better feedback.
Over the next two weeks, Mr. Martinelli provided written feedback to all
of his students and, in turn, received feedback from them. Many of the students
rated his feedback as eff ective, and some of the suggestions he received from his
students were useful to him. “I had a number of students tell me that they’d like
to do this more than once. Th ey felt like they’d like to get better, but they didn’t
know if they’d get a chance to. I’m considering using shorter extemporaneous
speech events like this every month so they can put the feedback into play.”
Mr. Martinelli, at the Teaching level of growth, would later use these pieces of
student data when he met with vice principal Ken Pappert the following month
to debrief a classroom observation.
4.3c: Needs-Based Instruction
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
The teacher
does not alter
instruction based
on student
needs.
The teacher relies on initial
instruction, with limited
opportunities for reteaching
at individual and small-
group levels. Needs-based
instruction occurs at times,
but the teacher relies
on impressions rather
than data.
The teacher organizes
individual, small-group,
and whole-class instruction
based on trend data and
matches students with
the specifi c instruction
that they need to progress
academically.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their ability to
organize individual, small-
group, and whole-class
instruction based on trend
data and match students
with the specifi c instruction
that they need to progress
academically.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 138IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 138 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 139
Although needs-based instruction is widely recognized in the research as a
key element of eff ective teaching (e.g., National Research Council, 2005), it does
not occur routinely in classrooms. Pianta, Belsky, Houts, and Morrison (2007)
studied more than 2,500 elementary classrooms and found that 91 percent of
the instructional time was dedicated to whole-group instruction or individual
seatwork; only 7 percent of the time did students work with their teacher in
groups of fi ve or fewer. Th is approach not only diminishes the learning but also
robs teachers of a vital conduit for building relationships with students.
As we have noted before, feedback “thrives on error,” and learning thrives
on the instruction that follows to correct the error. Further, as the term makes
clear, needs-based instruction targets precious instructional time exactly where
it’s needed, whether for intervention or for enrichment purposes. Forming
needs-based instructional groups allows the teacher to bring a level of precision
to the teaching, as it reduces the likelihood that students are either bored by
needless remediation or left behind because the teacher moved on before they
grasped the content.
Th e value of needs-based instruction was a diffi cult sell for Claire Hutchin-
son. A veteran teacher of high school Advanced Placement (AP) English for two
decades, she saw no reason to meet with small groups of students to address
their instructional needs. Although her administrator had met with her several
times over the course of two years, Ms. Hutchinson remained unswayed. Citing
her students’ pass rates on the AP English exam, she explained that her adher-
ence to the rigor of the course “weeds out” the students who can’t make the cut.
In other words, she saw herself as a gatekeeper. Her school used the FIT Teach-
ing Tool formatively and summatively, and the quarterly reviews that she per-
formed matched those performed by the instructional coach and the vice prin-
cipal. All showed a defi cit pattern on progress monitoring, error analysis, and
needs-based instruction, placing Ms. Hutchinson at the Not Yet Apparent level.
Her principal pointed to enrollment data in her course, noting that
although her pass rate was high, only 54 percent of the students who were in
her course on the fi rst day of school remained at the end of the year. After
accounting for those who transferred to other schools, a full 48 percent of her
former students had switched to other courses taught in the department. Th e
principal showed Ms. Hutchinson the subsequent achievement data on those
students, pointing out that the majority of them had scored at the profi cient
level on the state tests. In addition, 72 percent of those who had transferred into
another section of AP English passed the exam with a score of 3 or above. Th is
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 139IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 139 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

140 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
last statistic gave Ms. Hutchinson pause, and it opened the door to a growth-
producing conversation with her administrator about the merits of needs-based
instruction even with otherwise high-achieving students. Her principal later
remarked that although there was still much to be done to improve the teacher’s
instructional practice, the use of the data proved to be an important turning
point. “We’re meeting tomorrow to do a learning walk together,” he said.
Th e following morning, the two of them began with an observation in
an AP psychology class. Samuel Jenkins, at the Teaching growth level, spoke
briefl y to the two adults to catch them up on the work his students were doing.
“Today I’ve got them working in small groups,” he explained. “Th ose two groups
over there,” he motioned, “are locating research articles in the database on
perceptions. Th ey’ll be selecting a published experiment of their choice and
writing a summary of the hypothesis, participants, fi ndings, and implications.”
Turning, he gestured to another group. “I’m meeting with these students to
review how research studies are read and interpreted. I’ve selected a study
from the Journal of Experimental Psychology for them to work through. It’s
on a series of experiments about how people believe they ward off negative
outcomes through superstitious ‘avoidant actions.’ Participants read scenarios
and then were directed to knock on wood. Th ose who knocked in a pattern
away from themselves—as if they were pushing bad luck away—were less likely
to predict negative outcomes for the scenarios than participants who knocked
in a pattern toward themselves. It’s fascinating stuff .” Th e principal asked him
how he had selected the groups. “I had them complete a similar assignment
last week after I taught them how to write an article summary. I coded the
errors I saw—not just their grades—so I could fi gure out who needed what in
the way of reteaching. Th e group I’m meeting with now needs assistance with
summarizing the fi ndings in their own words. Th e next group meeting will be
shorter. Th ey just need some refi nement in using APA style in their citations.”
Ms. Hutchinson and the principal then visited an AP world history
classroom. Kendra Foster was not meeting in small groups while they were
observing, but she talked with both of her visitors about her practice. “I’m
still pretty new to this,” she said. “Rita [the instructional coach] and I were just
meeting about this. I’m comfortable with saying I’m at the Developing growth
level right now. When the principal asked her to elaborate, Ms. Foster replied,
“I’m defi nitely meeting more routinely with small groups to do follow-up
intervention and instruction, but Rita helped me see that I’m doing it mostly
based on what I think they need. I wouldn’t say I’m wrong, necessarily, but
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 140IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 140 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Assessing with a System | 141
when she questioned me, I had a hard time justifying why I had formed the
small groups I met with, other than just intuition,” she confessed. “I’m realizing
it’s not good enough to rely on my gut instincts alone. A goal I have for myself
this quarter is to bring a higher degree of intentionality to my decisions about
these needs-based groups.”
After touring several more AP classrooms, the principal asked Ms.
Hutchinson about her thinking and next steps. “I have to admit I was impressed
with several of the teachers who talked about why they were meeting with those
groups. I don’t really do that, and I’m not sure where to start,” she said. Her
principal paused and then suggested that she and the AP world history teacher
meet together with the instructional coach to discuss starting points. “Ms.
Foster’s got a goal for this quarter that you could benefi t from, and it’s closer
to where you are right now in this aspect of your practice. Although I could
see that there’s lots to learn from the AP psychology teacher who’s been doing
this for so long, that might not be your fi rst stop,” said the principal. With the
assistance of Rita Montgomery, the instructional coach who was at the Leading
growth level, Ms. Hutchison and Ms. Foster would both be able to inform each
other’s practice as they, in turn, grew their own.
Summing Up
Formative assessment is an essential tool for driving instruction, but its value is
diminished when it is done sporadically or less than systematically. Assessing
with a System ensures that the data collected are used to inform instruction.
Th is system begins with the learner in mind, as the expectations are conveyed
to students in a manner that is comprehensible to them. Students who lack
understanding of these expectations will have far more diffi culty formulating
and achieving goals. A formative assessment system continues with a means
for checking for understanding and analyzing the collected information to
make decisions about needs-based groups. Integrated throughout a formative
assessment system is the quality of the feedback we provide to learners, both
in terms of the type and conditions. Feedback, well done, does as much for the
teacher as it does for the learner because both are informed. Maybe we should
all start calling it informative assessment.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 141IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 141 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

142
5
Impacting Student
Learning
Th e purpose of teaching is to foster learning, and any measure of teaching must
address its impact on student learning. Of course, numerous factors magnify
a student’s ability or inability to learn. Some, such as a child’s birth and health
history and socioeconomic status, are beyond the direct infl uence of teachers.
But many other school-based factors do (thank goodness) contribute positively
to learning.
We are all in this profession because we have seen for ourselves how a
great teacher changes the trajectory of someone’s life. We’re not speaking of the
stuff of movies, with freakishly charismatic teachers standing on desks while the
background music swells; we’re talking about how real-life, eff ective teachers
operate. Th ey plan with purpose and instruct with intention. Th ey assess with a
system that operates in a carefully cultivated learning climate. And throughout
their careers, many rise to lead other teachers to continuously improve their
practice. What we do matters, even if our profession’s real story never makes it
to the multiplex.
Educators need to stop being afraid of articulating what they do and how
they know it makes a diff erence. Just because a politician or a police offi cer was
once in 3rd grade doesn’t mean that person is qualifi ed to teach—or to evaluate
teachers. However, they and many others are stakeholders who do have a
right to know how we are performing. Our collective ability to demonstrate
our impact on student learning to various stakeholders will strengthen the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 142IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 142 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 143
position that investments in education should be near the top of a society’s list
of priorities. Unfortunately, impact on student learning tends to be narrowly
assessed through single administrations of standardized tests. Nothing is
inherently wrong with these large-scale assessments per se; the problem lies in
the misapplication of one data point as a single measure of everything a teacher,
school, district, province, territory, state, or nation does (e.g., Ballou & Springer,
2015; Popham, 2013). Having said that, we believe that student performance
data can be a reasonable and valid dimension in teacher growth and leadership.
Teachers are positioned to demonstrate how student learning evolves in
the short term and across an entire school year. Th is is actually what we do
best—watch our students closely and make decisions to accelerate their learning
when it stalls. And what’s more, we pass this information on to our immediate
stakeholders: our students, their families, and our colleagues. Th e one audience
we don’t give enough attention to consists of the policymakers who make major
fi scal, governance, and programmatic decisions that aff ect our profession. Can
you blame them when they turn to standardized test scores? If educators don’t
provide any other information about student progress, people will use the
data they have, which means they’ll often draw inaccurate conclusions from
incomplete information.
Let’s paint a more complete picture for all of our stakeholders. In this
chapter, we discuss the two major factors that demonstrate the component
of Impacting Student Learning: (1) short-term evidence of progress toward
periodic goals throughout the school year and (2) long-term evidence of
attainment of transfer goals.
Th e FIT Teaching Tool has been designed to capture what it is that teachers
do. We avoid the old trope that “teachers matter”—that’s the premise of most
of those movies we talked about. In fact, it is what teachers do that matters
(Hattie, 2012). Th e fi rst four components of this tool capture the intellectual
and technical work of teachers. Th is fi nal component focuses attention on the
impact that this work has on student learning.
Factor 5.1: Short-Term Evidence of Learning
Th e evidence in “evidence-based teaching” consists of three major elements:
evidence for practice, evidence in practice, and evidence of practice (Todd, 2015).
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 143IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 143 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

144 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th e fi rst, evidence for practice, involves teacher knowledge of research about
eff ective practices, such as those that come from credible external sources (e.g.,
research journals, professional organizations, conferences, and workshops). Th e
second, evidence in practice, is the application of these methods. For instance,
providing feedback that is useful to learners is evidence in practice. If you know
the research base behind it, you’re also employing evidence for practice. But
the third facet, evidence of practice, requires that the teacher be able to furnish
qualitative and quantitative data about student outcomes (see Figure 5.1).
Ask eff ective teachers how they know when learning occurs, and you’ll
likely hear discussion of a student’s demonstration of procedural or conceptual
knowledge. Pressed further about evidence, the same teachers are likely to cite
progress on a measurement of some kind. It might be a checklist or something
more formal, such as a test. In other words, eff ective teachers don’t rely solely
on impressions and anecdotal information. Th ey know where the learner is
and where the learner needs to go next, and they have a method for gauging
this movement.
Th is skill is more diffi cult to develop than it might seem. Novice teachers
often confl ate evidence of student learning with evidence of their own teaching
practices (“I know they learned it because I taught it”), thus making it hard to
move forward in their practice (Hiebert, Morris, Berk, & Jansen, 2007). In other
words, they use evidence in practice instead of evidence of practice.
Figure 5.1 | Elements of Evidence-Based Practice
Evidence for practice FOUNDATION
Informational
Existing formal research provides the essential building blocks for
professional practice.
Evidence in practice PROCESS
Transformational
Locally produced evidence—data generated by practice—is meshed with
research-based evidence to provide a dynamic decision-making environment.
Evidence of practice OUTCOMES
Formational
User-reported evidence shows that the learner changes as a result of inputs,
interventions, activities, and processes.
Source: From “Evidence-Based Practice and School Libraries: Interconnections of Evidence, Advocacy and Actions,” by R. J. Todd, 2015, Knowledge Quest,
43(3), p. 9. Copyright 2015 by the American Library Association. Used with permission.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 144IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 144 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 145
So what counts as evidence? Todd (2015) calls evidence of practice the
“user-reported evidence that shows a learner changes as a result of inputs,
interventions, activities, and processes” (p. 9). We discussed opportunities to
check for understanding within a lesson previously. Now we turn our attention
to the ways in which summative information is used to gauge learning intentions
and success criteria (1.2a) throughout the year (short-term evidence), as well as
progress toward transfer goals (1.1a) at the end of instruction or the unit of
study (long-term evidence).
5.1: Short-term evidence of progress toward periodic goals
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
Students
consistently
do not meet
periodic goals
throughout the
school year.
The teacher is only
occasionally able to
demonstrate impact on
student learning measured
across units of study.
Evidence is drawn from
limited sources.
The teacher consistently
demonstrates signifi cant
impact on student learning
measured across units
of study, with evidence
drawn from a wide variety
of sources, including valid
and reliable summative
assessments as well as
observations and formative
assessments.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their work
with students such that they
are able to demonstrate
impact on student learning
measured across units
of study, with evidence
drawn from a wide variety
of sources, including valid
and reliable summative
assessments as well as
observations and formative
assessments.
Th e expectation that assessments should be analyzed to provide
evidence of students’ short-term learning has increased over the last decade.
Preservice candidates in teacher preparation programs are routinely required
to include evidence of learning for units of instruction they have planned and
implemented. One well-known example of this is the edTPA, a performance
assessment of preservice teacher candidates (e.g., Darling-Hammond, 2013).
One task involves the use of assessment information in a unit of instruction.
In addition to detailing the learning intentions and success criteria and the
plan to assess these goals, aspiring teachers must describe pre- and post-unit
performance of the entire group and analyze three student work samples with
teacher feedback that illustrate learning patterns for the class or group. Th is
feedback can be in written form, or the teacher candidate can submit a video
recording of the feedback event.
For practicing teachers, this factor focuses on periodic reviews of student
learning. Th e teacher, or groups of teachers, can defi ne the period in question.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 145IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 145 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

146 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
It is more than the daily checking for understanding described in Chapter 4 and
less than the long-term outcomes, which are covered in the next section of this
chapter. Some teachers engage with this factor at the end of a unit of instruction;
others do so weekly. To ensure that evidence of student learning is the focus
of schooling, this factor should be addressed several times each semester and
should involve collaborative conversations between and among educators.
Th ese reviews should never be reduced to a few forms to fi ll out and turn
in to an administrator. Rather, they should be a starting point for examining
what is working and what changes can be made when needed. Th e artifacts
are selected by the teacher to illustrate the learning that is occurring, and the
discussions can occur with colleagues and instructional coaches as well as
administrators. Conversations such as these form the heart of professional
learning communities as educators plan collaboratively, using the PLC’s guiding
questions (DuFour et al., 2008):
• What do we want our students to learn?
• How will we know they have learned it?
• How will we respond when some students don’t learn?
• How will we extend and enrich the learning for students who are
already profi cient?
Th e data collected and analyzed focus on progress toward learning
intentions and their associated success criteria. Measures include criterion-
and norm-referenced instruments such as informal reading inventories, as well
as benchmark assessments that are periodically administered throughout the
year. However, the most frequently used assessments for measuring short-term
evidence of learning are those created by teachers. End-of-unit tests are one way
to gauge students’ progress in their learning and to take action as needed for
individuals and groups. Projects and performances are another way. Essays are
also useful in determining students’ developing profi ciency. Of course, a bit of a
formative assessment process happens in each of these traditionally summative
tools. In truth, anytime teachers are looking at summative test results to inform
future practice, they are engaging in formative assessment. Figure 5.2 presents
a (nonexhaustive) list of some of the other testing sources that can be used to
demonstrate short-term learning.
Th e usefulness of a teacher-created assessment depends on its soundness
as a measurement instrument. All assessments are in some way fl awed; the goal
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 146IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 146 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 147
is to reduce those fl aws to a reasonable level. We’ll discuss the trustworthiness
of assessments later in the chapter. For now, it is important to note that the
design of assessments that measure students’ learning during a unit of study
should adhere to the following basic principles of measurement:
• Th e content of the test should align with learning intentions and
success criteria.
• Multiple methods and measures should be used to assess student
progress.
• Response opportunities should be equitable in terms of reducing
unintended infl uences drawn from students’ cultural and background
knowledge.
Many teachers rely on collaboration with colleagues to design sound
teacher-made assessments and to review their results. For example, the 7th
grade English teachers at Grand Elms Middle School met monthly to design
their unit assessments. Th e team members used a checklist to review their draft
assessments in order to keep basic design principles in mind. “It’s easy to drift
away from these ideas,” said team member Denise Carter. “It’s been a long time
since I took a measurement class in my teacher preparation program.” Th ese
collaborative planning team meetings focused on assessment construction,
interwoven with reviews of student results.
Don Hargrove, another team member, explained, “We come to these
meetings with our student results on a chart so that we can talk about individual
Figure 5.2 | Short-Term Learning Measures
Criterion- and norm-referenced tests
• Reading inventories
• Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS)
• Developmental Spelling Analysis (DSA)
• Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA)
• Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills
(DIBELS)
• Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement
• Oral and silent reading fl uency measures
• Math Reasoning Inventory (MRI)
Benchmark tests
• District benchmark tests
• Career and Technical Education competencies
Teacher assessments
• Unit tests
• Graded writing of an assignment
• Running records
• Pre-/post-testing of a unit of study
• Rubrics for individual assignments
• Response to Intervention (RTI) monitoring tools
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 147IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 147 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

148 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
students who are not making progress.” Alberta Marks, another 7th grade
teacher, added her perspective. “It’s been helpful to me when we see patterns
that might be related to instruction. Th ere are times when one of us gets really
strong results compared to the rest of the team,” she said. “We used to get
nervous about this, but we’ve learned that sooner or later all of us wind up
on one side of the equation or the other,” Ms. Carter said. “In fact, on the last
unit, which was on poetry, Don’s classes scored really well. So we talked about
what he did instructionally that diff ered from the rest of us. When we teach the
poetry unit next year, we’ll add his ideas to make the unit even stronger.”
Th e team worked together to plot where students were scoring so they
could fi nd out which students were making progress and which might need
further remediation. Th e majority of the 7th graders were progressing (defi ned
by this group as scoring at least 70 percent on the end-of-unit assessments), but
each teacher had a few students who continued to struggle. “Over the year, I get
a better idea of my needs-based grouping, and I’m discovering that I’m better
able to anticipate who is going to need more pre-teaching,” said Ms. Marks.
Th ese teachers were at the Teaching level of growth for this factor because they
were demonstrating how they used short-term evidence of learning to monitor
the success of their students and were making adjustments as needed.
Art teacher Keith Porter didn’t have a team to collaborate with but used
short-term evidence of learning to gauge his own practice. “My students are
creating wire sculptures, and, of course, grading them is pretty subjective,”
he said. He used a rubric for each project, although the criteria remained the
same: craftsmanship, elements of design, concept application, and productivity.
“I don’t include things like behavior and eff ort in the rubrics, because these
misdirect me and the students about their learning progress,” he said, also
noting that there is a schoolwide citizenship rubric to measure these important,
but nonacademic, attributes. “With each major assignment, I score students on
the rubric and then meet with them individually to talk about their trajectory.
Th ese are really valuable for both of us because we each gain some insight about
motivation and interest in art.” At the Teaching level of growth, Mr. Porter was
using his short-term evidence of learning to monitor his processes while also
leveraging this information to positively aff ect students.
Unfortunately, 5th grade teacher Gwen Metcalf was at the Not Yet
Apparent level of growth, and she didn’t even know it. Ms. Metcalf had been
teaching 5th grade for many years, but when her state adopted a new set of
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 148IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 148 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 149
mathematics standards, she didn’t substantially alter her teaching practices. Th e
instructional coach, Jim O’Hearn, met with her to discuss student progress, and
Ms. Metcalf provided anecdotal evidence of learning but not much else. “She
mostly talked about individual students, but she talked at least as much about
their compliance as she did about their math competence,” the coach remarked
later. However, he did get her to agree to administer a math diagnostic test
developed by the county offi ce of education.
Th e results shocked her. Th e diagnostic test, aligned to the new standards,
showed that even though it was November, 82 percent of Ms. Metcalf ’s students
were performing well below expected levels. When she met again with the
instructional coach to review the results, she asked how she could improve
her students’ learning. “Th is opened up some great dialogue between us
about mathematical reasoning, public discourse about problems, and worked
examples,” he said. “I’ve been providing PD to the math department for over a
year on these topics, but she wasn’t applying it yet,” he said. “It took looking at
data that showed that her students weren’t making progress to get her attention.”
Many students do not perform at expected levels, and lower student
performance alone is not a measure of teacher eff ectiveness. However, a
teacher should be able to demonstrate accelerated gains as the year progresses.
First grade teacher Petra Wolfe was a case in point. “Our state doesn’t have a
mandatory kindergarten requirement, and many of the families of my students
are either unaware that our district has free kindergarten or just aren’t able
to make a half-day class work around their complicated schedules,” she said.
Unsurprisingly, the percentage of Ms. Wolfe’s incoming 1st graders scoring
below grade level on the DIBELS screening was higher than the district average.
But because Ms. Wolfe’s district reported information across three benchmark
administrations, she was able to see how individual students were performing
and how their learning trajectories were changing. “I am proud to say that over
the year with me they ratchet up,” she said.
Th is factor of the FIT Teaching Tool has aff orded her a new platform
for teaching others about using benchmark data as evidence of short-term
learning. “I am now a part of the district’s benchmark committee, and I do a
workshop for new primary teachers every summer on how these data can give
you a perspective on the gains your kids are making,” she said. “Using data from
previous years, I show them that I don’t close the gap completely. Th e majority
of my kids still aren’t at the district average by the end of the year,” Ms. Wolfe
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 149IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 149 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

150 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
explained. “But I am able to show the teachers how the performance levels are
shifting to more positive results with each administration of the benchmark. I
remind them that what we do in terms of teaching makes a diff erence,” she said.
Her ability to teach others about demonstrating their short-term impact on
student learning places her at the Leading growth level.
One of the members of the summer data institute Ms. Wolfe leads was
Markus Leeds. He had spent most of his teaching career in the intermediate
grades, and his recent transfer to primary education had been bumpy for him.
“Last year was the fi rst time I taught kindergarten ever,” he explained, “and I
had diffi culty getting my kids moving toward the short-term goals that lead
to long-term transfer skills.” In his annual performance review the previous
year, he and his administrator had agreed that he was at the Developing level of
growth, because although a few of his students were making gains, most were
not. “When I analyzed the district benchmark assessments, the results were
fl at,” said Mr. Leeds. “I had the same percentage of kiddos remaining at the same
levels between the second semester and the end of the year,” he said. “It’s like
they just stalled.”
Although Mr. Leeds had been using short-term evidence of student
learning to measure progress (unlike Ms. Metcalf, the 5th grade math teacher
who didn’t know her students were falling behind), he had not been successful
in accelerating their progress. In addition to the summer data institute, Mr.
Leeds planned to attend a summer institute focused on emergent reading and
writing. “I need to hone my craft so I can get some better results. I’ve been an
eff ective teacher with older students. Now I’ve got a new challenge with the
younger ones. I’m up for it,” he said.
Factor 5.2: Long-Term Evidence of Learning
Learning isn’t just short term, and it’s not necessarily linear. Students also learn
across longer periods of time, often in fi ts and starts; sometimes they experience
dips in their understanding as new information is considered and assimilated.
But time should reveal a generally positive trend, with evidence of learning
accumulating. As weeks and months pass, teachers can collect evidence that
students are learning to transfer skills, strategies, content, and ideas to new
situations and problems. Of course, we need assessment tools to measure this
as well as tools that measure students’ retention of information.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 150IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 150 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 151
5.2: Long-term evidence of attainment of transfer goals
NYA Developing Teaching Leading
Students
consistently do
not meet long-
term transfer
goals.
Students inconsistently
meet long-term transfer
goals, or the teacher does
not set challenging but
achievable goals.
Most students consistently
meet challenging but
achievable long-term
transfer goals.
The teacher supports
colleagues in their work
with students such that
most of the students meet
challenging but achievable
long-term transfer goals.
Education is awash with standardized tests that measure progress toward
annual goals, and these tests have expanded greatly in the United States and
other countries in this century. Norm-referenced standardized tests and their
cousin, criterion-referenced standards-based tests, are used variously to evaluate
programs, individual students, and, increasingly, teachers. Th e explosion of
large-scale assessments has led to the misapplication of their results as a means
to quantify teacher quality. As Popham (2013) points out, these instruments are
instructionally insensitive, in that they cannot diff erentiate between students
who have been well taught and those who have not. Th ese standardized and
standards-based tests primarily measure what students know, and although a
lot of their knowledge comes directly from school experiences, they acquire a
signifi cant amount from outside sources and experiences. Th ere just isn’t a way
to tell what portion of their knowledge can be attributed directly and solely to
classroom learning.
To address this shortcoming, some states have adopted value-added mea-
sures (VAMs) in an attempt to control for these variances. However, this approach
continues to be hotly debated, with supporters (e.g., Glazerman et al., 2010) and
detractors (e.g., American Statistical Association, 2014) lining up on either side.
Given the unsettled nature of this issue, we cannot support a VAM approach for
measuring teacher quality, because its eff ectiveness has not yet been satisfactorily
demonstrated. Having said that, we are aware that a number of states and territo-
ries have adopted this process. As Goldhaber (2015) notes, “What makes value-
added [measures] distinct from classroom observations (the nearly universal way
teachers are evaluated today) . . . is that it is an objective measure that does not
rely on human interpretation of teacher practices” (p. 88). Th is is a compelling
argument—and one that resonates with stakeholders and policymakers who jus-
tifi ably want us to be accountable for the results of our work.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 151IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 151 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

152 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
However, Goldhaber (2015) completes the sentence by saying, “. . . and by
design, it is a system in which teachers are evaluated relative to one another
rather than relative to an absolute standard (i.e., it creates a distribution in
which teachers can be ranked)” (p. 88). It is this ranking eff ect that we fi nd most
troubling, because we believe it unintentionally undermines the values the
FIT Teaching Tool rests upon. As Johnson (2015) states, there are signifi cant
concerns about these possible unintended consequences of VAM, including
• Making it more diffi cult to fi ll high-need teaching assignments
• Discouraging shared responsibility for students
• Undermining the promise of standards-based evaluation
• Generating dissatisfaction and turnover among teachers (p. 120)
But we are compelled to return to our original premise: students, families,
colleagues, and policymakers are correct in asking us to demonstrate the ways
that teachers are eff ective. When it comes to demonstrating progress toward
long-term transfer goals (1.1a), we align with Popham (2013) and Darling-
Hammond (2013), who state that educators should welcome the opportunity
to demonstrate their long-term impact on student learning. Relevant sources
of evidence include criterion- and norm-referenced state tests, as well as state
and teacher-created end-of-course exams. And don’t forget the importance of
student performance portfolios, as well as other curriculum-based summative
measures. We need to use all of these data to shine a light on student learning.
By doing so, teachers are able to provide a more nuanced report than a single
number or letter grade can accomplish. When multiple measures are used,
rather than a single test score, teachers are able to demonstrate attainment (i.e.,
criterion-referenced measures of profi ciency or grade-level expectations) as
well as improvement (i.e., growth across the year), including acceleration for
those initially working below expectations (Guskey, 2013).
We are especially interested in reporting on transfer goals to gauge impact
on student learning. You will recall that transfer goals have the following
qualities (McTighe, 2014):
• Th ey are long-term in nature.
• Th ey are performance-based and require application, not just recall.
• Th ey call for using habits of mind.
Students’ abilities to apply mathematical reasoning to solve problems and
to construct a cogent written argument to support a claim are just two examples
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 152IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 152 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 153
of transfer goals. Many discrete facts and skills are associated with both, but not
all of them need to be measured. For young children, especially those below
the age of standardized test administration, transfer goals include the growing
ability to be able to decode and read for meaning, and to apply principles of
number sense to solve problems. A 2nd grade teacher can provide long-term
evidence of her eff ect on her students’ learning by analyzing comparative data
(e.g., from September and May) on students’ reading levels, as gauged through
the many informal reading inventories conducted throughout the year. A
10th grade biology teacher does something similar by using the preliminary
assessment she and her department designed for the beginning of the course,
paired with the state end-of-course exam results, and then discussing the
implications of her fi ndings with her colleagues. A special educator provides
long-term evidence of attainment by furnishing the family of a student with an
individualized education program that includes the September and May results
of a group-administered reading survey test. All of these are ways to legitimately
demonstrate long-term progress toward annual goals. More examples of sources
of long-term evidence of student learning appear in Figure 5.3.
High school PE teacher Valeria Caprara administered the President’s
Youth Fitness Challenge to her students at the beginning and end of the school
year. She and her department were committed to helping adolescents learn
more about how they could maintain a healthy weight and an active lifestyle.
Th e online calculator for the “fi tnessgram” produced a report on each student’s
body mass index (BMI), walking and running skills, fl exibility, and strength.
“Th is has proven to be motivating for lots of students, who are dismayed
when they fi nd out how out of shape they are,” said Ms. Caprara. Her district
graduation guidelines required several years of physical education, providing
even longer-term data for students to watch. “It’s rewarding when you see
Figure 5.3 | Evidence of Long-Term Student Learning
Criterion- and norm-referenced tests
• Advanced Placement tests
• State standards tests
• Standardized tests
• President’s Challenge physical fi tness tests
• Certifi cation tests for career and technical education
courses
• Pre- and post-testing applications of screening and
diagnostic tools across a school year
Teacher-created assessments
• Semester/end-of-course examinations
• Student portfolio assessments with rubrics
• Formal end-of-study exhibitions with rubrics
• Formal recital performances with rubrics
• Culminating projects of problem-based or project-
based learning
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 153IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 153 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

154 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
how some students really learn to monitor their BMI and activity levels from
9th grade on,” she said. Th ese reports were not the only evidence she relied
on, noting that many other outside factors aff ected students’ health. “My
department designed a district end-of-course test on the content we cover each
year, including body systems and dynamics, nutrition, and fi tness principles,”
she said. “We use this and student surveys from the beginning and end of the
year to look for shifts in attitudes, habits, and knowledge.” At the Teaching
growth level for this factor, Ms. Caprara was able to demonstrate her positive
impact on student learning.
High school fi re science teacher Captain Lonnie Harrison led cadets
through a demanding four-year course of study for this career pathway. Students
began in 9th grade with physical fi tness training and an introduction to careers,
progressing over the next three years to learn about building construction,
principles of forestry management, fi re suppression, and rescue techniques.
Each course included an end-of-course examination of the content. Captain
Harrison led the district’s Career and Technical Education (CTE) eff ort to
design these end-of-course exams to parallel the state’s certifi cation exams for
entry-level fi refi ghters. Although not all students who began the fi re sciences
pathway in 9th grade remained in it through 12th grade, many did. Th erefore,
Captain Harrison used pass rates for the state certifi cation exam as an additional
measure of his long-term eff ect on student learning. Since assuming the
position fi ve years earlier, Captain Harrison had steadily increased the number
of students who passed this rigorous exam. He used the data as part of a district
program review, thus securing additional funding to expand the program to a
neighboring high school. “I’m working with the CTE administrator and the Fire
Academy staff to develop their program for next year,” said Captain Harrison.
“It’s not just the content. I’m helping them identify those long-term transfer
skills the cadets need to successfully complete the program. Th ese will be the
measures they use to gauge student success each year and help students pass
that state test,” he said. Captain Harrison is using his knowledge of long-term
impact on student learning to develop new programs, providing evidence of his
Leading level of growth for this factor.
Tenth grade band teacher John Rush identifi ed at the Developing level. “I
was hired by [the district] last year, and I have to say I wasn’t accustomed to
looking at my long-term impact on student learning in my old district. I mostly
just graded on participation. If they showed up for performances, they got an A.”
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 154IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 154 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 155
He worked with the administrator at his new school to identify short-term and
long-term assessments, including unit tests on music theory and performance-
based assessments of fundamentals. “I consulted with the local university’s
music department and found out how they use beginning- and end-of-year
video assessments.” Mr. Rush explained that each student provided a short video
of his or her performance. “I score them on body and hand position and on
embouchure [mouth position] if it’s relevant. I also assess breathing technique
and note accuracy.” Last year’s results were not encouraging. “When I reviewed
the results from the beginning of the school year and compared them with the
end, most of my students hadn’t made much progress on their performances,”
he said. “I’m talking over half my students.” He was encouraged, however, by
their written assessments of music theory, which were somewhat better. “I spent
the summer mapping out a new sequence so that I’m devoting more attention to
the performance part of it, not just the lecture phase,” said Mr. Rush. “Of course,
they have to know theory, but if they’re not also steadily improving on their
technique, then it’s more of a music appreciation class than a band class.”
English teacher Nicole Landry was in the Peer Assistance and Review
(PAR) program, which was jointly administered by the teachers union and the
district. Because Ms. Landry had failed to make progress on her summative
teacher evaluations for the previous two years, she had been identifi ed by her
site administrator as a candidate for the program. Although she had 10 years of
experience, her performance on a signifi cant number of the criteria in the FIT
Teaching Tool was at the Not Yet Apparent or Developing level. Since working
with the expert mentor teacher assigned to her through the PAR program the
previous year, she had made positive progress, especially in the Planning with
Purpose, Instructing with Intention, and Assessing with a System components.
“I can’t say this has been an easy process,” she said. “I’ve really had to
confront my practices and habits.” However, she noted that she and her mentor
were seeing results. “I’ve been tracking my short-term impact on student
learning this year, way more than I ever did before,” she confessed. “We’ve both
seen that my students are making gains. I’m feeling very hopeful that they are
going to perform much better this year on the district’s end-of-course exam,”
she said. “Last year only 32 percent of my students passed it. Based on how
they’ve done this year so far, I am expecting that number to be a lot higher.”
At this point, Karen Winters, her PAR mentor, added, “I hope that you’re
also seeing that it’s because of your attention to planning and instruction. You’ve
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 155IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 155 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

156 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
always had a positive climate, but now you’re a stronger and more eff ective
teacher. Th ese practices are all linked, and you’re so much stronger than you
were 18 months ago.”
Fourth grade teacher Leilani Hale was preparing for her summative
teacher evaluation meeting with her principal and had been assembling
artifacts as evidence of her practice. Now in her third year as a teacher, Ms.
Hale was experiencing a degree of confi dence she had not had in her fi rst two
years. “Th is year I’m feeling a lot more solid than I had before. I’m really getting
much better at understanding how 4th graders think,” she smiled. She worked
in a Hawaiian-English dual immersion school, and one source of evidence she
planned to use to demonstrate her long-term impact on student language was
an assessment of profi ciency in ‘Ōlelo Hawai‘i (Hawaiian language). “Only a
small percentage of our families speak ‘Ōlelo Hawai‘i fl uently, although they are
themselves Native Hawaiian,” she explained. “We encourage families to learn to
speak the language alongside their children, but not a lot of them do.” Many of
her students were at a disadvantage in this regard, as out-of-school application
of a second language can reinforce newly learned skills. Even among those who
speak ‘Ōlelo Hawai‘i, there is a belief that their primary job is to reinforce the
use of English (Yamauchi, Lau-Smith, & Luning, 2008). “Many of my students
are still struggling to reach profi ciency,” said Ms. Hale. She used language-
profi ciency measures from the beginning and the end of the year to track their
progress. “I want to have more students scoring at profi cient levels by the
end of the year,” said the teacher. “But I’m also interested in growth across the
year.” Th is year, the majority of her students demonstrated expected and even
accelerated levels of growth. Ms. Hale’s measures of growth and profi ciency
on state content standards and language profi ciency placed her at the Teaching
level of growth for this factor.
Children in kindergarten teacher Denise Lyons’s class didn’t take state
standardized tests, but she was still able to draw on several assessments to
demonstrate her long-term impact on learning. Ms. Lyons reported on each
child’s gains using the battery of screening and readiness instruments her grade
employed at the beginning and end of the year. Th is information was useful for
families as she met with them to report on their child’s progress. In addition, the
1st grade team applied this information as they built classes for the following
year. Most of her students performed at or near grade level by the end of the year,
which was about average across her district. A few children didn’t make expected
progress, but this was not used as a single indicator of her skill as a teacher.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 156IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 156 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 157
Ms. Lyons said, “For the three students I have this year who are showing
limited progress, I include information about interventions as well.” She
produced her RTI data for these three students and met with their families and
the Student Study Team (SST) to discuss next steps. Th e SST looked to her to
provide the kind of summative and formative RTI data that were necessary for
making decisions, including referrals for additional testing. During this school
year, she developed a list of formative and summative assessments for use
with kindergartners and identifi ed long-term transfer skills for them to refer
to. “It can be tricky assessing children who are emergent readers, writers, and
mathematicians,” she said. Her involvement with the SST in identifying tools
for determining short- and long-term progress of kindergartners was evidence
of her Leading growth level for this factor.
Sixth grade science teacher Sid Petrosian was struggling with demonstrating
his long-term impact on student learning. He was hired after the school year
started when another teacher moved out of state, and the school’s focus on
project-based learning posed a challenge for him. “I understand the principles,
of course. Th e professional learning has been great, and I’ve had lots of support
this year,” he said. However, his students’ performance on the capstone project
proposals (to prevent or reduce wildfi res in a drought-stricken state park) fell
fl at. Th e students’ oral reports in particular were below expectations, as described
in the district rubric. “I sure learned a lot from this,” said Mr. Petrosian. Of course,
one data point should not be used in determining long-term impact, but his
students’ scores on the state standards-based science test were also depressed.
He and his administrator agreed that he was at the Developing level for this
factor, although he performed more strongly on several other components,
especially Instructing with Intention. “I’m going to revisit the Planning with
Purpose criteria this summer,” he said, noting that he had primarily relied on
the planning work completed by his team this year. “I need to be more involved
in the planning process,” he said. “I’m sure that’s going to make me much better
equipped for teaching them what they need to know and be able to do.”
Trustworthy Assessment Tools
When demonstrating long-term impact on student learning, much of the data
gathered come from assessments created by individual teachers, teams, or
departments. Th ese assessments tools need to be trustworthy—that is, reliable
and valid. Assessments that are not reasonably trustworthy can limit the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 157IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 157 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

158 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
ability of teachers to articulate their impact on student learning, as the results
themselves may be invalid.
Teachers, students, parents, and leaders all want to know: What did
students learn? Th e tools used to determine the answer to this very important
question matter. Th e format of the assessment can aff ect students’ ability to
demonstrate their understanding. Th is reality is evident when students say, “I
wish this could have been an essay rather than a multiple-choice test.” Teachers
have to carefully consider appropriate formats for assessments and match them
to the learning that was to have occurred.
In addition, the tool has to measure what was supposed to have been
taught and not measure other factors, such as personal experiences or cultural
knowledge. Students should not be seen as more profi cient on a given assessment
because their family vacations in France, for example. Th ere’s nothing wrong
with spending summers in France. It’s just not fair if success on the assessment
is based on that experience rather than what was actually taught.
When it comes to summative, formal assessments such as those used
by state  departments of education to monitor student achievement trends,
companies spend millions of dollars in the development and revision of
assessment items to ensure that the tools are reliable and valid. We are not
suggesting that teachers focus their eff orts on creating tests that meet the
standards of quality required of major test publishers. We do think that teachers
should know about reliability and validity and then do their best to create
assessments that are trustworthy. Here is how these qualities are defi ned by the
Joint Committee on the Standards for Educational and Psychology Testing of
the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological
Association, and the National Council on Measure ment in Education (2014):
Reliability/Precision: Th e degree to which test scores for a group of
test takers are consistent over repeated applications of a measurement
procedure and then are inferred to be dependable and consistent for an
individual test taker; the degree to which the scores are free of random
errors of measure for a given group. (p. 222)
Validity: Th e degree to which accumulated evidence and theory support
a specifi c interpretation of test scores for a given use of a test. If multiple
interpretations of a test score for diff erent uses are intended, validity
evidence for each interpretation is needed. (p. 225)
Th ese are fairly heady concepts. But think about it this way. If you step on a
scale each day and the scale reports a consistent weight, and you do, in fact,
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 158IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 158 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 159
weigh the same, the scale is reliable. If the number on the scale changed all of
the time when your weight did not, the scale could not be reliable. But reliability
by itself is not enough. If the scale gives you the same weight each day but
it’s not your actual weight, it is reliable but it is not valid. Validity requires a
fair representation of the phenomenon being measured. Imagine if your scale
reported your height rather than your weight!
For the work that most teachers do, the concept of validity is considered
more important than reliability. Kelley (1927), widely recognized for developing
the idea, claimed that a test is valid if it measures what it claims to measure.
We did not include a factor about validity, or even trustworthiness, in the FIT
Teaching Tool. Instead, we think that this is a conversation that teachers should
have as part of their professional learning community and with their evaluators.
When presenting evidence collected to document the eff ect on learning in
the short term or the long term, teachers should be able to explain how they
know that the assessment measured what they intended. Th e development of
the assessment occurs as part of the Planning with Purpose component, and
the use of the assessment, including any reteaching needed, occurs as part of
Assessing with a System. Naturally, teachers make adjustments throughout
the year to their planning, instructing, and assessing. As part of this process,
teachers consider the tools that they use to determine student performance,
which is where this information is valuable.
For example, Algebra II teacher Diana Simon developed a midterm
assessment given at the end of the fi rst semester. When she analyzed the
results, she realized that 90 percent of the questions came from the last six
weeks of the class. Th us, the content validity was not adequate to determine
students’ mastery of the fi rst-semester content. She met with her administrator
to talk about revising the assessment for the following year and collaborated
with her colleagues on an improved end-of-course exam. She also realized that
she needed to review the items from the fi rst semester with her students before
they took the fi nal, as they had not been held accountable for that information
at the semester’s end.
First-year teacher Jamie Ramirez asked his colleagues on the 3rd grade
team to review assessment items before he gave them to students. He made
changes to the assessments based on the comments he received, and his
colleagues sometimes used some of his assessment items as well. Th is test for
validity helped ensure that the assessments actually measured what they were
intended to measure.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 159IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 159 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

160 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th is example illustrates one reason that common formative assessments
are powerful. When teachers meet to discuss items, the overall validity of the
assessment can improve (Ainsworth, 2015). Imagine the power of a group of
6th grade science teachers meeting to determine what students should know
and how they will demonstrate that knowledge. Th is collaborative work will
likely increase the trustworthiness of the assessments used, not to mention the
overall unit of study.
Sometimes teachers want to take this process a step further and determine
how closely their assessments align with other, similar tests. One way to do this
is to compare a teacher-created assessment with the results on a benchmark
or summative assessment. For example, Brandi Hayes wanted to know if her
Algebra I summative assessment had any predictive validity in comparison
with the state test. She worked with her instructional coach to calculate the
number and was pleased to learn that there was a strong correlation between
the two. It is important to note that this is not always a necessary condition. In
some classes or grade levels, the course covers more than is included on a state
test. In this case, if the teacher wanted to include this type of information in a
performance review, it would be wise to use only items from the assessment
that relate to the external measure.
Teacher Growth and Leadership
Th e FIT Teaching Tool includes many elements that we believe are critical to
successful teacher growth and leadership. As we have shown, this tool can be
used as a self-assessment, with an individual teacher reviewing the criteria and
determining his or her strengths and areas of growth. Gary Schneider did just
that. He read through the tool and examples of eff ective teaching and noted
that his instruction was strong. He regularly provided relevant learning targets,
accurately modeled for students, and engaged them in collaborative learning.
He also realized that his assessment system was not very systematic. He relied
heavily on summative assessments, so he set out to learn more about error
analysis and reteaching. On his own, he became a more eff ective teacher.
Mr. Schneider performed his own gap analysis by comparing his current
performance with his desired performance. On some level, we all do this,
whether we realize it or not. But the critical thing is that Mr. Schneider took
action to address the gap he found. He identifi ed resources, read about error
analysis, and talked with others who were using similar approaches. It was self-
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 160IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 160 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 161
directed learning at its best, and he grew a lot from the experience. But it could
have been made easier for him.
What Mr. Schneider did was hard work. It’s easier to work collaboratively
with colleagues to fi gure out where to focus growth opportunities. At our
school, teachers review the FIT Teaching Tool each year and identify areas of
strength and areas of interest for growth. Th ey then form collaborative learning
teams of between fi ve and eight people focused on a single topic. Th ey use their
observation time, and their professional learning time, to hone their skills. For
example, one group of teachers focused on transfer goals. Th ey found some
resources on the Internet and read a few books together. Th ey observed one
another in their classrooms and debriefed afterward. Over time, with practice
and feedback, they dramatically improved their skills in meeting the diverse
needs of students. At the same time, their colleagues were engaged in improving
their purpose setting, revising their formative assessments, building a more
welcoming culture, and developing electronic systems to store student work. In
each case, the group of people engaged in an area of growth did so because of
their refl ection on the FIT Teaching Tool and their desire to be the best possible
educators they could be.
Teacher leadership is tied not to job titles but to disposition. Teacher
growth becomes teacher leadership when educators have opportunities to shape
each other’s knowledge and thinking. Every one of us has worked on teams
where individuals regularly contributed their expertise to forward the group’s
work. In other words, the leadership emanated as needed from individuals
who recognized that they could deepen the understanding of the group. It
wasn’t whether the team had a person identifi ed as “leader,” while everyone
else was a “follower.” High-performing teams in any profession are composed
of people who contribute in order to strengthen the team, and the roles are
fl uid, not static. For example, the collaborative learning teams that are formed
to examine an element of their instructional practice are fi lled with teachers
who take on leadership behaviors, such as locating and sharing research,
inviting colleagues into their classrooms, and spending time in the classrooms
of others. For example, two English teachers collaborated to examine guided
instruction (ingredient 3.2). Th e observing teacher, Gabriella Gutierrez, wrote
to her colleague, Leslie Parker:
Today I went into your room and saw students engaged in annotating
articles through Google Docs. Th e content was advanced, but the
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 161IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 161 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

162 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
support you included within each document guided students in their
learning and enabled them to be successful. You required students to
highlight the text that supported their response to each question within
the document, which gave them focus. I enjoyed watching Yajaira
and Yasmine work together in understanding the complex text on the
condition of hysteria.
Th e following day, these two teachers ate lunch together and talked further
about the lesson. Importantly, they were both exhibiting leadership skills. Ms.
Gutierrez, the observing teacher, asked great questions and listened carefully.
But Ms. Parker, the teacher who taught the lesson, was a leader too. She had
invited her junior colleague into class, recognizing it as a great avenue for
mentoring as well as an opportunity to hone her own practice. At its heart,
teacher leadership is best appreciated as a mutually benefi cial process.
Improvement comes when teachers engage in meaningful discussion about
quality educational experiences, refl ect on their skill levels, and then focus on
getting better. Teachers have to be learners as well, knowing what is expected
and where they currently perform and then fi guring out how to close the gap.
Teacher leadership blossoms under these conditions, especially as educators
position themselves as “lead learners.” Th ey actively seek opportunities to engage
with the profession, and with fellow professionals, because they are driven to
strengthen their practice. After all, we’re teachers, and learning is our business.
Summing Up
Teachers should have an impact on students’ learning. Th e fi nal component
of the FIT Teaching Tool requires that teachers, and those who support them,
consider both short-term and long-term evidence of learning. Having said
that, we feel it is important to emphasize, again, that relying on one measure,
especially an externally mandated formal assessment, is not likely to produce
signifi cant changes in teacher growth or student learning. Instead, teachers
and leaders should focus on multiple measures of student achievement. Th ey
should discuss the impact they’ve had on student learning with colleagues as
part of a larger PLC eff ort and use these collaborative conversations to improve
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 162IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 162 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Impacting Student Learning | 163
learning outcomes for students. Demonstrating—and publicizing—this kind of
eff ectiveness can go a long way in combating the perceptions that some teachers
(and schools) are unsuccessful.
When teams of teachers, and their coaches and formal leaders, reach
agreements about quality (for example, through an extensive discussion about
what each indicator means and might look like), compliance is replaced by
commitment. As a result, expectations naturally rise due to deeper under-
standing, and implementation, of each ingredient. In essence, the words on
the page take on life and guide teacher planning, instruction, assessment,
and collaboration. When this occurs, teacher growth can be exponential, and
students benefi t greatly.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 163IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 163 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

165
Conclusion
Taking Up the Challenge
Th e FIT Teaching Growth and Leadership Tool includes fi ve elements that we
believe are critical to successful teacher growth and leadership:
1. Planning with Purpose
2. Cultivating a Learning Climate
3. Instructing with Intention
4. Assessing with a System
5. Impacting Student Learning
Each of these components is important and provides opportunities
for educators to continue to grow and develop. Improvement in teaching
and learning will not come if administrators try to fi re their way to school
improvement—identifying poor teachers and getting rid of them. Nor will
better teaching and learning come when well-meaning administrators score
summative evaluations based on limited evidence and then fi le the reports
away. It will come when teachers take charge of their own growth, engage in
meaningful discussion about quality educational experiences, refl ect on their
skill levels, and then focus on getting better.
As teachers, we lead learners, but we must also be learners ourselves. Th is
means knowing what is expected of us and where we currently perform and
then fi guring out how to close any gaps that exist. Becoming a FIT Teacher
means embracing learning as our business, our calling, our challenge, and
our responsibility. It means leading our students, leading our colleagues, and
leading our profession.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 165IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 165 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

166
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the educators who supported the development of the FIT
Teaching Tool by providing us with feedback and feed forward during our work.
Carl Atkinson, Assistant Superintendent, Springfi eld Township School
District, PA
Rosemary Cataldi, Education Manager, Nobel Learning Communities
Page Dettmann, Executive Director of Middle School Curriculum, Sarasota
County Schools, FL
Judy A. Fancher, Assistant Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment, PreK–12, Hacienda La Puente Unifi ed School District, CA
Toby Grosswald, Education Manager, Nobel Learning Communities
Karen Janney, Superintendent, Sweetwater Union High School District, CA
Kelly McAmis, Assistant Superintendent, Garden Grove Unifi ed School
District, CA
Kathleen Poole, Assistant Superintendent, Northshore School District, WA
Mike Ritzius, Associate Director of Professional Development and
Instructional Issues, New Jersey Education Association
Julie Scullen, Teaching and Learning Specialist for Secondary Reading,
Anoka-Hennepin Independent School District, MN
Rich Wilson, Associate Director of Professional Development and
Instructional Issues, New Jersey Education Association
Nancy Young, Director of Elementary Curriculum Instruction and
Assessment, Northshore School District, WA
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 166IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 166 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

167
The FIT
Teaching
Growth and
Leadership
Tool
1. Planning with Purpose
2. Cultivating a Learning
Climate
1.1: Learning Intentions and
Progressions
1.1a: Identifying transfer goals
1.1b: Linking to theme, problem,
project, or question
1.1c: Identifying lesson-specifi c
learning intentions
1.1d: Identifying content learning
intentions
1.1e: Identifying language
learning intentions
1.2: Evidence of Learning
1.2a: Identifying success criteria
1.2b: Designing evidence-
collection opportunities
1.3: Meaningful Learning
1.3a: Designing aligned
experiences
1.3b: Planning for differentiation
2.1: Welcoming
2.1a: Positive regard
2.1b: Physical environment
2.1c: Community building
2.2: Growth Producing
2.2a: Builds agency and identity
2.2b: Encourages academic risk
taking
2.2c: Repairs harm
2.3: Effi cient
2.3a: Rules, routines, and
procedures
2.3b: Record keeping
3. Instructing with Intention 4. Assessing with a System 5. Impacting Student Learning
3.1: Focused Instruction
3.1a: Clear learning intentions
3.1b: Relevant learning intentions
3.1c: Accurate representation of
critical content
3.2: Guided Instruction
3.2a: Notices student needs
3.2b: Scaffolds support
3.3: Collaborative Learning
3.3a: Interactive learning routines
3.3b: Task complexity
3.3c: Language support
4.1: Assessment to Support
Learners
4.1a: Comprehensible expectations
4.1b: Goal-setting opportunities
4.2: Assessment to Monitor
Learning
4.2a: Checks for understanding
4.2b: Error analysis
4.3: Assessment to Inform
Learning
4.3a: Types of feedback
4.3b: Usefulness of feedback
4.3c: Needs-based instruction
5.1: Short-Term Evidence of
Learning
5.2: Long-Term Evidence of
Learning
Appendix
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 167IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 167 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

168 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Th e fi ve components of the FIT Teaching Tool are designed for both
formative and summative use by teachers and supervisors to guide their work
iteratively, so that conversations about planning and instruction are considered
not in isolation but rather as part of an ongoing process.
1. Planning
with Purpose
2. Cultivating
a Learning
Climate

3. Instructing
with Intention

4. Assessing
with a System

5. Impacting
Student Learning
Th e FIT Teaching Tool embeds the highest forms of teacher practice into
the Leading level of the rubrics. Th is level indicates teachers’ willingness and
ability to collaborate with colleagues and eff orts to enhance the larger school
community. In the FIT Teaching Tool, a teacher’s professional growth is treated
not as an isolated obligation but rather as fundamental to improving practice
and collegial experiences. It would be unusual for a teacher to attain the highest
level without a signifi cant commitment to personal learning.
Rubrics
Teachers can use the rubrics formatively, as a self-assessment, as well as in
conjunction with teacher peers and coaches. Supervisors can use the rubrics
summatively. Th e four levels of growth are the following:
• Not Yet Apparent (NYA): Observed only occasionally. Th is level is
indicated only when there is a complete lack of evidence that the teacher has
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 168IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 168 4/11/16 11:28 AM4/11/16 11:28 AM

Appendix | 169
considered a necessary aspect of instruction and incorporated it into practice.
Th is should be diff erentiated from NA (Not Applicable), which indicates a rare
situation when the ingredient is not expected as part of the teacher’s practice.
• Developing: Most typical with teachers new to the profession or new to a
grade level, subject area, or curriculum implementation. Th is level of growth is
marked by inconsistency of practice and is selected when it is clear that teachers
understand the criteria but the implementation is falling short of a desired level
of success.
• Teaching: Most typical with experienced teachers implementing criteria
with fi delity. Th is level is selected when it is clear that the teacher’s practice is
intentional, solidly implemented, and resulting in success for students.
• Leading: Most typical with seasoned teachers who have embraced a
particular aspect of the criteria at its highest level and are providing support,
guidance, and resources for colleagues. Leading teachers develop learning
opportunities for adults that respect individual levels of personal practice and
focus on extending collective growth. Teachers at this level have classrooms
with open doors and consider themselves continuous learners, thereby aff ecting
classrooms outside their own.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 169IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 169 4/11/16 11:08 AM4/11/16 11:08 AM

170 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
1
.1
:
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
I
n
te
n
ti
o
n
s
a
n
d
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
io
n
s

Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
1.
1a
: I
de
nt
ify
in
g
tra
ns
fe
r g
oa
ls
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

co
ns
id
er
tr
an
sf
er
g
oa
ls

du
rin
g
pl
an
ni
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
tr
an
sf
er
g
oa
ls

bu
t d
oe
s n
ot
u
se
th
em
to
a
lig
n
pl
an
s f
or
st
ud
en
t a
pp
lic
at
io
n
an
d
as
se
ss
m
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
la
ns
w
ith
g
ra
de
– o
r
co
ur
se
-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
tr
an
sf
er
g
oa
ls
in

m
in
d
an
d
us
es
th
em
to
a
lig
n
ac
tiv
iti
es

an
d
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
la
n
w
ith
g
ra
de
– o
r
co
ur
se
-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
tr
an
sf
er
g
oa
ls
in

m
in
d
an
d
us
e
th
em
to
a
lig
n
ac
tiv
iti
es

an
d
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
.
1.
1b
: L
in
ki
ng
to

th
em
e,
p
ro
bl
em
,
pr
oj
ec
t,
or
q
ue
st
io
n
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

lin
k
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns

to
th
em
es
, p
ro
bl
em
s,
pr
oj
ec
ts
, o
r q
ue
st
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
m
in
im
al
ly
li
nk
ed

to
th
em
es
, p
ro
bl
em
s,
pr
oj
ec
ts
, o
r
qu
es
tio
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
li
nk
ed
to
th
em
es
,
pr
ob
le
m
s,
pr
oj
ec
ts
, o
r q
ue
st
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
id
en
tif
y
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
li
nk
ed
to
th
em
es
,
pr
ob
le
m
s,
pr
oj
ec
ts
, o
r q
ue
st
io
ns
.
1.
1c
: I
de
nt
ify
in
g
le
ss
on
-s
pe
ci
fi c

le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

id
en
tif
y
le
ss
on
-s
pe
ci
fi c

le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
m
ay
b
e
to
o
br
oa
d
to

ac
co
m
pl
is
h
du
rin
g
a
sp
ec
ifi
c l
es
so
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
a
ch
ie
va
bl
e
du
rin
g
a
sp
ec
ifi
c l
es
so
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
id
en
tif
y
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
a
ch
ie
va
bl
e
du
rin
g
a
sp
ec
ifi
c l
es
so
n.
1.
1d
: I
de
nt
ify
in
g
co
nt
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
in
te
nt
io
ns
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

id
en
tif
y
co
nt
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
in
te
nt
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
co
nt
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
m
ay
b
e
va
gu
e
or

no
t g
ra
de
– o
r c
on
te
nt
-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te

or
a
re
p
rim
ar
ily
ce
nt
er
ed
a
ro
un
d
is
ol
at
ed
a
ct
iv
iti
es
o
r t
as
ks
ra
th
er

th
an
o
n
le
ar
ni
ng
ta
rg
et
s o
r e
nd
ur
in
g
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
gs
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
co
nt
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
cl
ea
rly
st
at
ed
a
nd

gr
ad
e-
o
r c
ou
rs
e-
ap
pr
op
ria
te
a
nd

ar
e
re
la
te
d
to
le
ar
ni
ng
ta
rg
et
s a
nd

en
du
rin
g
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
gs
ra
th
er
th
an

ta
sk
s o
r a
ct
iv
iti
es
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
id
en
tif
y
co
nt
en
t
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
cl
ea
rly

st
at
ed
a
nd
g
ra
de
– o
r c
ou
rs
e-
ap
pr
op
ria
te
a
nd
a
re
re
la
te
d
to
le
ar
ni
ng

ta
rg
et
s a
nd
e
nd
ur
in
g
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
gs

ra
th
er
th
an
ta
sk
s o
r a
ct
iv
iti
es
.
1.
1e
: I
de
nt
ify
in
g
la
ng
ua
ge
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

id
en
tif
y
la
ng
ua
ge
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
la
ng
ua
ge

le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
m
ay
b
e
va
gu
e
or
n
ot
g
ra
de
– o
r c
on
te
nt
-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
de
nt
ifi
es
la
ng
ua
ge

le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
cl
ea
rly

st
at
ed
; f
oc
us
ed
o
n
vo
ca
bu
la
ry
,
st
ru
ct
ur
e,
o
r f
un
ct
io
n;
a
nd
g
ra
de
– o
r
co
nt
en
t-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
id
en
tif
y
la
ng
ua
ge

le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
th
at
a
re
cl
ea
rly

st
at
ed
; f
oc
us
ed
o
n
vo
ca
bu
la
ry
,
st
ru
ct
ur
e,
o
r f
un
ct
io
n;
a
nd
g
ra
de
– o
r
co
nt
en
t-a
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
.
1 . P L A N N I N G W I T H P U R P O S E
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 170IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 170 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Appendix | 171
1
.2
:
E
v
id
e
n
c
e
o
f
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
1.
2a
: I
de
nt
ify
in
g
su
cc
es
s c
rit
er
ia
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

de
si
gn
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
re
la
te
d
to

th
e
le
ss
on
’s
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
es
ig
ns
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
th
at
in
di
re
ct
ly
re
la
te

to
th
e
le
ss
on
’s
es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
, p
er
m
it
lim
ite
d
ap
pl
ic
at
io
n
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s t
o
fo
st
er
tr
an
sf
er
, o
r
yi
el
d
in
co
nc
lu
si
ve
d
at
a
ar
ou
nd
st
ud
en
t
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r c
ol
la
bo
ra
te
s w
ith
st
ud
en
ts

to
d
es
ig
n
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts

th
at
re
la
te
d
ire
ct
ly
to
th
e
le
ss
on
’s
es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
a
nd

pe
rm
it
st
ud
en
ts
th
e
op
po
rtu
ni
ty
to

de
m
on
st
ra
te
th
ei
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
in

or
de
r t
o
fo
st
er
lo
ng
-te
rm
tr
an
sf
er
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
co
lla
bo
ra
te
w
ith

st
ud
en
ts
to
d
es
ig
n
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
th
at
re
la
te
d
ire
ct
ly
to

th
e
le
ss
on
’s
es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
a
nd
p
er
m
it
st
ud
en
ts
th
e
op
po
rtu
ni
ty
to
d
em
on
st
ra
te
th
ei
r
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g
in
o
rd
er
to
fo
st
er
lo
ng
–
te
rm
tr
an
sf
er
.
1.
2b
: D
es
ig
ni
ng

ev
id
en
ce
-c
ol
le
ct
io
n
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot
p
la
n
to
co
lle
ct
e
vi
de
nc
e
of

st
ud
en
t u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
la
ns
to
in
fre
qu
en
tly

co
lle
ct
e
vi
de
nc
e
of
st
ud
en
t
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g
or
re
lie
s s
ol
el
y
on

su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
t d
at
a.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r h
as
a
cl
ea
r p
la
n
fo
r
co
ns
is
te
nt
ly
co
lle
ct
in
g
ev
id
en
ce
o
f
st
ud
en
t u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
re
la
te
d
to

es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
d
ev
el
op
a
cl
ea
r p
la
n
fo
r c
on
si
st
en
tly
co
lle
ct
in
g
ev
id
en
ce

of
st
ud
en
t u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
re
la
te
d
to

es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
.
1
.3
:
M
e
a
n
in
g
fu
l
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
1.
3a
: D
es
ig
ni
ng

al
ig
ne
d
ex
pe
rie
nc
es

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

de
si
gn
a
lig
ne
d
le
ar
ni
ng

ex
pe
rie
nc
es
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
es
ig
ns
e
xp
er
ie
nc
es
th
at

ar
e
m
in
im
al
ly
li
nk
ed
to
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
. A
ct
iv
iti
es
ra
re
ly
re
qu
ire

st
ud
en
ts
to
co
ns
tru
ct
m
ea
ni
ng

th
ro
ug
h
in
te
ra
ct
io
n
w
ith
th
e
te
ac
he
r,
th
e
co
nt
en
t m
at
er
ia
ls
, a
nd
e
ac
h
ot
he
r.
In
st
ea
d,
th
ey
re
ly
o
n
re
pl
ic
at
io
n
ra
th
er

th
an
in
no
va
tio
n.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
es
ig
ns
e
xp
er
ie
nc
es
th
at

ar
e
cl
ea
rly
a
lig
ne
d
to
th
e
es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
a
nd
re
qu
ire

st
ud
en
ts
to
e
xp
er
im
en
t w
ith
co
nc
ep
ts

an
d
ac
tiv
el
y
co
ns
tru
ct
m
ea
ni
ng

th
ro
ug
h
in
te
ra
ct
io
n
w
ith
th
e
te
ac
he
r,
th
e
co
nt
en
t m
at
er
ia
ls
, a
nd
e
ac
h
ot
he
r.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
d
es
ig
n
ex
pe
rie
nc
es
th
at

ar
e
cl
ea
rly
a
lig
ne
d
to
th
e
es
ta
bl
is
he
d
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
a
nd
re
qu
ire

st
ud
en
ts
to
e
xp
er
im
en
t w
ith
co
nc
ep
ts

an
d
ac
tiv
el
y
co
ns
tru
ct
m
ea
ni
ng

th
ro
ug
h
in
te
ra
ct
io
n
w
ith
th
e
te
ac
he
r,
th
e
co
nt
en
t m
at
er
ia
ls
, a
nd
e
ac
h
ot
he
r.
1.
3b
: P
la
nn
in
g
fo
r
di
ffe
re
nt
ia
tio
n
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

di
ffe
re
nt
ia
te
in
st
ru
ct
io
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r h
as
a
li
m
ite
d
di
ffe
re
nt
ia
tio
n
re
pe
rto
ire
o
r p
ro
vi
de
s
di
ffe
re
nt
ia
tio
n
th
at
is
o
nl
y
lo
os
el
y
ba
se
d
on
fo
rm
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
t d
at
a.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
es
ig
ns
fo
r d
iff
er
en
tia
te
d
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
ba
se
d
on
fo
rm
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
t d
at
a,
u
si
ng
fl
ex
ib
le

gr
ou
pi
ng
a
nd
p
ro
vi
di
ng
a
v
ar
ie
ty
o
f
ex
pe
rie
nc
es
th
at
m
ee
t s
tu
de
nt
n
ee
ds

or
in
te
re
st
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
d
es
ig
n
fo
r d
iff
er
en
tia
te
d
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
ba
se
d
on
fo
rm
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
t d
at
a,
u
si
ng
fl
ex
ib
le

gr
ou
pi
ng
a
nd
p
ro
vi
di
ng
a
v
ar
ie
ty
o
f
ex
pe
rie
nc
es
th
at
m
ee
t s
tu
de
nt
n
ee
ds

or
in
te
re
st
s.
1 . P L A N N I N G W I T H P U R P O S E
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 171IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 171 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

172 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
2
.1
:
W
e
lc
o
m
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
2.
1a
: P
os
iti
ve
re
ga
rd
Th
e
te
ac
he
r h
as
st
ra
in
ed

re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
w
ith
st
ud
en
ts
o
r d
oe
s
no
t h
ol
d
st
ud
en
ts
in
h
ig
h
es
te
em
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r e
xh
ib
its
p
os
iti
ve
re
ga
rd

bu
t h
as
li
m
ite
d
in
te
ra
ct
io
ns
w
ith

m
or
e
ch
al
le
ng
in
g
st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r a
ct
iv
el
y
se
ek
s t
o
es
ta
bl
is
h
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
n
po
si
tiv
e
re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
w
ith
a
ll
st
ud
en
ts
b
y
sh
ow
in
g
in
te
re
st
in
th
ei
r a
ca
de
m
ic

liv
es
, i
nt
er
es
ts
, a
nd
a
sp
ira
tio
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
e
st
ab
lis
h
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
n
po
si
tiv
e
re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
w
ith

al
l s
tu
de
nt
s b
y
sh
ow
in
g
in
te
re
st
in

th
ei
r a
ca
de
m
ic
li
ve
s,
in
te
re
st
s,
an
d
as
pi
ra
tio
ns
.
2.
1b
: P
hy
si
ca
l
en
vi
ro
nm
en
t
Th
e
cl
as
sr
oo
m
is
d
is
or
ga
ni
ze
d,

cl
ut
te
re
d,
o
r d
irt
y
an
d
ne
ga
tiv
el
y
af
fe
ct
s s
tu
de
nt
le
ar
ni
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r h
as
d
es
ig
ne
d
bu
t h
as

di
ffi
cu
lty
m
ai
nt
ai
ni
ng
a
n
in
vi
tin
g
cl
as
sr
oo
m
e
nv
iro
nm
en
t t
ha
t w
ill

su
pp
or
t s
tu
de
nt
le
ar
ni
ng
a
nd

m
ov
em
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
es
ig
ns
a
nd
m
ai
nt
ai
ns

an
in
vi
tin
g
cl
as
sr
oo
m
e
nv
iro
nm
en
t
th
at
su
pp
or
ts
st
ud
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
an
d
m
ov
em
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
d
es
ig
n
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
n
an
in
vi
tin
g
cl
as
sr
oo
m
e
nv
iro
nm
en
t
th
at
su
pp
or
ts
st
ud
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
an
d
m
ov
em
en
t.
2.
1c
: C
om
m
un
ity

bu
ild
in
g
Th
e
te
ac
he
r r
ar
el
y
cr
ea
te
s
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s f
or
st
ud
en
ts
to
b
ui
ld

re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
w
ith
o
ne
a
no
th
er
a
nd

co
m
m
un
ic
at
es
w
ith
fa
m
ili
es
o
nl
y
w
he
n
th
er
e
is
a
p
ro
bl
em
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r o
cc
as
io
na
lly
e
ng
ag
es

in
re
la
tio
ns
hi
p
bu
ild
in
g
be
tw
ee
n
an
d
am
on
g
st
ud
en
ts
o
r h
as
li
m
ite
d
co
nt
ac
t w
ith
fa
m
ili
es
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
tre
ng
th
en
s t
he
so
ci
al

fa
br
ic
o
f t
he
cl
as
sr
oo
m
b
y
bu
ild
in
g
re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
b
et
w
ee
n
an
d
am
on
g
st
ud
en
ts
a
nd
th
ei
r f
am
ili
es
in
o
rd
er

to
fo
st
er
a
p
os
iti
ve
co
m
m
un
ity
o
f
le
ar
ne
rs
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
st
re
ng
th
en
th
e
so
ci
al

fa
br
ic
o
f t
he
cl
as
sr
oo
m
b
y
bu
ild
in
g
re
la
tio
ns
hi
ps
a
m
on
g
st
ud
en
ts
a
nd

th
ei
r f
am
ili
es
in
o
rd
er
to
fo
st
er
a

po
si
tiv
e
co
m
m
un
ity
o
f l
ea
rn
er
s.
2
.2
:
G
r
o
w
th
P
r
o
d
u
c
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
2.
2a
: B
ui
ld
s a
ge
nc
y
an
d
id
en
tit
y
Th
e
te
ac
he
r b
el
itt
le
s,
sh
am
es
,
or
h
um
ili
at
es
st
ud
en
ts
o
r u
se
s
sa
rc
as
m
, d
im
in
is
hi
ng
st
ud
en
t
ag
en
cy
a
nd
id
en
tit
y.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r o
fte
n
us
es
la
ng
ua
ge

th
at
co
nt
rib
ut
es
to
st
ud
en
ts
’
le
ar
ne
d
he
lp
le
ss
ne
ss
a
nd
, m
or
e
ra
re
ly
, b
ui
ld
s r
es
ili
en
ce
a
nd

pe
rs
is
te
nc
e.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r f
ra
m
es
la
ng
ua
ge
so

th
at
st
ud
en
ts
d
ev
el
op
a
se
ns
e
of

re
si
lie
nc
e
an
d
pe
rs
is
te
nc
e
in
th
ei
r
le
ar
ni
ng
li
ve
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
fr
am
e
la
ng
ua
ge
so

th
at
st
ud
en
ts
d
ev
el
op
a
se
ns
e
of

re
si
lie
nc
e
an
d
pe
rs
is
te
nc
e
in
th
ei
r
le
ar
ni
ng
li
ve
s.
2 . C U LT I V AT I N G A L E A R N I N G C L I M AT E
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 172IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 172 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Appendix | 173
2.
2b
: E
nc
ou
ra
ge
s
ac
ad
em
ic
ri
sk
ta
ki
ng
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot
e
nc
ou
ra
ge

ris
k
ta
ki
ng
a
nd
p
ot
en
tia
l f
ai
lu
re
,
in
st
ea
d
va
lu
in
g
st
ud
en
t c
om
fo
rt
an
d
co
nt
en
tm
en
t o
ve
r c
ha
lle
ng
e.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r v
al
ue
s a
cc
ur
ac
y
ov
er
p
ot
en
tia
l g
ro
w
th
a
nd
o
nl
y
oc
ca
si
on
al
ly
ch
al
le
ng
es
st
ud
en
ts

to
e
xt
en
d
th
ei
r t
hi
nk
in
g,
e
ve
n
if
it
m
ea
ns
in
iti
al
fa
ilu
re
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r f
os
te
rs
a
g
ro
w
th

m
in
ds
et
fo
r s
tu
de
nt
s b
y
cr
ea
tin
g
a
sa
fe
a
nd
re
sp
ec
tfu
l e
nv
iro
nm
en
t
w
he
re
fa
ilu
re
is
n
ot
ri
di
cu
le
d
bu
t c
on
si
de
re
d
an
im
po
rta
nt

co
m
po
ne
nt
o
f t
he
le
ar
ni
ng
p
ro
ce
ss
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
fo
st
er
a
g
ro
w
th

m
in
ds
et
fo
r s
tu
de
nt
s b
y
cr
ea
tin
g
a
sa
fe
a
nd
re
sp
ec
tfu
l e
nv
iro
nm
en
t
w
he
re
fa
ilu
re
is
n
ot
ri
di
cu
le
d
bu
t c
on
si
de
re
d
an
im
po
rta
nt

co
m
po
ne
nt
o
f t
he
le
ar
ni
ng
p
ro
ce
ss
.
2.
2c
: R
ep
ai
rs
h
ar
m
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot
a
dd
re
ss

di
sr
up
tio
ns
a
nd
m
is
be
ha
vi
or
o
r
ro
ut
in
el
y
ha
s o
th
er
s o
ut
si
de
th
e
cl
as
sr
oo
m
a
dd
re
ss
b
eh
av
io
r i
ss
ue
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r’s
re
sp
on
se
s t
o
di
sr
up
tio
ns
a
nd
m
is
be
ha
vi
or
a
re

pr
im
ar
ily
re
sp
ec
tfu
l b
ut
re
ac
tiv
e,

an
d
th
e
re
tu
rn
to
p
ro
du
ct
iv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
is
o
fte
n
de
la
ye
d.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r e
xp
ec
ts
, p
la
ns
fo
r,
an
d
re
sp
on
ds
to
d
is
ru
pt
io
ns
o
r
m
is
be
ha
vi
or
in
a
m
an
ne
r t
ha
t
re
sp
ec
ts
st
ud
en
ts
a
nd
fo
cu
se
s o
n
a
re
tu
rn
to
p
ro
du
ct
iv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
e
xp
ec
t,
pl
an

fo
r,
an
d
re
sp
on
d
to
d
is
ru
pt
io
ns

or
m
is
be
ha
vi
or
in
a
m
an
ne
r t
ha
t
re
sp
ec
ts
st
ud
en
ts
a
nd
fo
cu
se
s o
n
a
re
tu
rn
to
p
ro
du
ct
iv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
.
2
.3
:
E
ffi
c
ie
n
t
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
2.
3a
: R
ul
es
, r
ou
tin
es
,
an
d
pr
oc
ed
ur
es

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot
e
st
ab
lis
h
ru
le
s,
ro
ut
in
es
, a
nd
p
ro
ce
du
re
s,
re
su
lti
ng
in
a
co
nf
us
in
g
le
ar
ni
ng

en
vi
ro
nm
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r e
st
ab
lis
he
s s
om
e
ru
le
s,
ro
ut
in
es
, a
nd
p
ro
ce
du
re
s,
bu
t t
he
y
ar
e
us
ed
in
co
ns
is
te
nt
ly
o
r d
o
no
t
an
tic
ip
at
e
co
m
m
on
si
tu
at
io
ns
,
re
su
lti
ng
in
n
ee
dl
es
s l
ea
rn
in
g
in
te
rr
up
tio
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
ac
tiv
el
y
es
ta
bl
is
he
s
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
ns
ru
le
s,
ro
ut
in
es
, a
nd

pr
oc
ed
ur
es
th
at
e
na
bl
e
st
ud
en
ts

to
se
lf-
re
gu
la
te
, r
es
ul
tin
g
in

sm
oo
th
cl
as
sr
oo
m
o
pe
ra
tio
ns
th
at

m
ax
im
iz
e
le
ar
ni
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
ro
ac
tiv
el
y
es
ta
bl
is
h
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
n
ru
le
s,
ro
ut
in
es
, a
nd

pr
oc
ed
ur
es
th
at
e
na
bl
e
st
ud
en
ts

to
se
lf-
re
gu
la
te
, r
es
ul
tin
g
in

sm
oo
th
cl
as
sr
oo
m
o
pe
ra
tio
ns
th
at

m
ax
im
iz
e
le
ar
ni
ng
.
2.
3b
: R
ec
or
d
ke
ep
in
g
Th
e
te
ac
he
r’s
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l a
nd

no
ni
ns
tru
ct
io
na
l r
ec
or
ds
a
re

co
ns
is
te
nt
ly
in
co
m
pl
et
e,
d
el
ay
ed
,
no
t s
ec
ur
ed
, o
r m
is
si
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r m
ai
nt
ai
ns
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l
an
d
no
ni
ns
tru
ct
io
na
l r
ec
or
ds
, b
ut

th
es
e
ar
e
so
m
et
im
es
d
el
ay
ed
o
r
in
co
m
pl
et
e,
m
ak
in
g
th
em
le
ss

us
ef
ul
to
st
ud
en
ts
, f
am
ili
es
, a
nd

co
lle
ag
ue
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r m
ai
nt
ai
ns
b
ot
h
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l a
nd
n
on
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l
re
co
rd
s s
o
th
at
d
at
a
ar
e
im
m
ed
ia
te
ly
a
va
ila
bl
e
fo
r p
la
nn
in
g
an
d
to
in
fo
rm
st
ud
en
ts
, f
am
ili
es
,
an
d
co
lle
ag
ue
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
m
ai
nt
ai
n
bo
th

in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l a
nd
n
on
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l
re
co
rd
s s
o
th
at
d
at
a
ar
e
im
m
ed
ia
te
ly
a
va
ila
bl
e
fo
r p
la
nn
in
g
an
d
to
in
fo
rm
st
ud
en
ts
, f
am
ili
es
,
an
d
co
lle
ag
ue
s.
2 . C U LT I V AT I N G A L E A R N I N G C L I M AT E
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 173IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 173 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

174 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
3
.1
:
F
o
c
u
s
e
d
I
n
s
tr
u
c
ti
o
n
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
3.
1a
: C
le
ar
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

es
ta
bl
is
h
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
w
ith
th
e
st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r e
st
ab
lis
he
s t
he
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
w
ith
st
ud
en
ts
a
t t
he

be
gi
nn
in
g
of
th
e
le
ss
on
se
gm
en
t
bu
t d
oe
s n
ot
re
tu
rn
to
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
a
t a
ny
o
th
er
ti
m
e
du
rin
g
th
e
le
ss
on
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r u
se
s t
he
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
to
fo
cu
s s
tu
de
nt
s
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
(s
uc
h
as
d
ur
in
g
tra
ns
iti
on
s a
nd
cl
os
ur
e
ac
tiv
iti
es
).
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
u
se
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
to
fo
cu
s s
tu
de
nt
s
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
(s
uc
h
as
d
ur
in
g
tra
ns
iti
on
s a
nd
cl
os
ur
e
ac
tiv
iti
es
).
3.
1b
: R
el
ev
an
t
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

es
ta
bl
is
h
th
e
re
le
va
nc
e
of

th
e
co
nt
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r l
oo
se
ly
o
r v
ag
ue
ly

es
ta
bl
is
he
s t
he
re
le
va
nc
e
of
th
e
co
nt
en
t t
o
st
ud
en
ts
. T
he
re
le
va
nc
e
of

th
e
co
nt
en
t i
s n
ot
re
vi
si
te
d.

Re
le
va
nc
e
is
e
st
ab
lis
he
d
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
ne
d
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
a
s
st
ud
en
ts
a
re
re
m
in
de
d
ab
ou
t w
hy
th
ey

ar
e
le
ar
ni
ng
th
e
sp
ec
ifi
c c
on
te
nt
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
e
st
ab
lis
h
an
d
m
ai
nt
ai
n
re
le
va
nc
e
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
a
s
st
ud
en
ts
a
re
re
m
in
de
d
ab
ou
t w
hy
th
ey

ar
e
le
ar
ni
ng
th
e
sp
ec
ifi
c c
on
te
nt
.
3.
1c
: A
cc
ur
at
e
re
pr
es
en
ta
tio
n
of

cr
iti
ca
l c
on
te
nt
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

pr
ov
id
e
ac
cu
ra
te
co
nt
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s a
cc
ur
at
e
co
nt
en
t
th
at
is
lo
os
el
y
lin
ke
d
w
ith
le
ar
ni
ng

in
te
nt
io
ns
. T
he
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
pr
ev
en
ts

st
ud
en
ts
fr
om
e
ng
ag
in
g
in
re
la
te
d
ta
sk
s o
r f
ai
ls
to
p
ro
vi
de
th
em
w
ith
th
e
ap
pr
op
ria
te
fo
un
da
tio
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s a
cc
ur
at
e
co
nt
en
t t
ha
t i
s c
le
ar
ly
li
nk
ed
w
ith
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns
. T
he
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
en
su
re
s s
tu
de
nt
s h
av
e
th
e
fo
un
da
tio
n
ne
ce
ss
ar
y
fo
r t
he
ta
sk
s t
he
y
w
ill

ac
co
m
pl
is
h.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
ro
vi
de
a
cc
ur
at
e
re
pr
es
en
ta
tio
ns
o
f c
rit
ic
al
co
nt
en
t t
ha
t
ar
e
lin
ke
d
w
ith
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
in
te
nt
io
ns

an
d
pr
ov
id
e
a
fo
un
da
tio
n
fo
r r
el
at
ed

ta
sk
s.
3 . I N S T R U C T I N G W I T H I N T E N T I O N
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 174IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 174 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Appendix | 175
3 . I N S T R U C T I N G W I T H I N T E N T I O N
3
.2
:
G
u
id
e
d
I
n
s
tr
u
c
ti
o
n
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
3.
2a
: N
ot
ic
es
st
ud
en
t
ne
ed
s
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s
no
t n
ot
ic
e
st
ud
en
ts
’
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, e
rr
or
s,
or

co
nf
us
io
ns
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r o
nl
y
oc
ca
si
on
al
ly
n
ot
ic
es

st
ud
en
ts
’ m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, e
rr
or
s,
or

co
nf
us
io
ns
, a
s e
vi
de
nc
ed
b
y
m
in
im
al

fo
llo
w
-u
p
pr
ob
es
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r n
ot
ic
es
st
ud
en
ts
’
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, e
rr
or
s,
or
co
nf
us
io
ns

by
a
sk
in
g
qu
es
tio
ns
to
p
ro
be

th
ei
r t
hi
nk
in
g,
p
ay
in
g
at
te
nt
io
n
to

no
nv
er
ba
l c
ue
s,
or
a
na
ly
zi
ng

st
ud
en
t w
or
k.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
n
ot
ic
e
st
ud
en
ts
’
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, e
rr
or
s,
or
co
nf
us
io
ns

by
a
sk
in
g
qu
es
tio
ns
to
p
ro
be

th
ei
r t
hi
nk
in
g,
p
ay
in
g
at
te
nt
io
n
to

no
nv
er
ba
l c
ue
s,
or
a
na
ly
zi
ng

st
ud
en
t w
or
k.
3.
2b
: S
ca
ffo
ld
s
su
pp
or
t
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

sc
af
fo
ld
su
pp
or
t f
or

st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r a
t t
im
es
o
ffe
rs
q
ue
st
io
ns
,
pr
om
pt
s,
an
d
cu
es
to
sc
af
fo
ld
su
pp
or
t
of
st
ud
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g,
b
ut
a
t o
th
er
ti
m
es

m
ov
es
to
d
ire
ct
e
xp
la
na
tio
ns
in
st
ea
d
of
sc
af
fo
ld
in
g
fi r
st
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
ca
ffo
ld
s s
up
po
rt
fo
r
st
ud
en
ts
u
si
ng
p
ro
m
pt
s a
nd
cu
es

w
he
n
st
ud
en
t r
es
po
ns
es
d
em
on
st
ra
te

in
co
rr
ec
t o
r p
ar
tia
l u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
,
re
se
rv
in
g
di
re
ct
e
xp
la
na
tio
ns
o
nl
y
fo
r
si
tu
at
io
ns
w
he
n
pr
om
pt
s a
nd
cu
es
a
re

in
su
ffi
ci
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
sc
af
fo
ld
su
pp
or
t f
or

st
ud
en
ts
u
si
ng
p
ro
m
pt
s a
nd
cu
es

w
he
n
st
ud
en
t r
es
po
ns
es
d
em
on
st
ra
te

in
co
rr
ec
t o
r p
ar
tia
l u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
,
re
se
rv
in
g
di
re
ct
e
xp
la
na
tio
ns
o
nl
y
fo
r
si
tu
at
io
ns
w
he
n
pr
om
pt
s a
nd
cu
es
a
re

in
su
ffi
ci
en
t.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 175IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 175 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

176 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
3
.3
:
C
o
ll
a
b
o
r
a
ti
v
e
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
3.
3a
: I
nt
er
ac
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
ro
ut
in
es

Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot
u
se

co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng

ro
ut
in
es
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r u
se
s c
ol
la
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng

ro
ut
in
es
b
ut
d
oe
s n
ot
te
ac
h
th
e
pr
oc
es
se
s a
nd
p
ro
ce
du
re
s n
ec
es
sa
ry

fo
r s
tu
de
nt
s t
o
m
ax
im
iz
e
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l
tim
e.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
ys
te
m
at
ic
al
ly
te
ac
he
s
th
e
pr
oc
es
s a
nd
p
ro
ce
du
ra
l s
ki
lls

ne
ed
ed
fo
r c
ol
la
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng

ro
ut
in
es
th
at
w
ill
b
e
us
ed
th
ro
ug
ho
ut

th
e
un
it
or
sc
ho
ol
y
ea
r.
Th
is
is

ap
pa
re
nt
a
s s
tu
de
nt
s d
em
on
st
ra
te

cl
ea
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
o
f c
ol
la
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
ro
ut
in
es
in
o
rd
er
to
m
ax
im
iz
e
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l t
im
e.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
su
pp
or
t s
tu
de
nt
s
in
a
cq
ui
rin
g
th
e
pr
oc
es
s a
nd

pr
oc
ed
ur
al
sk
ill
s n
ee
de
d
to
e
ng
ag
e
in
co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
ro
ut
in
es
in

or
de
r t
o
m
ax
im
iz
e
in
st
ru
ct
io
na
l t
im
e.

3.
3b
: T
as
k
co
m
pl
ex
ity
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s
no
t m
on
ito
r s
tu
de
nt

co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
e
w
or
k.

Th
e
te
ac
he
r u
se
s c
ol
la
bo
ra
tiv
e
le
ar
ni
ng
, b
ut
th
e
ta
sk
s a
re

in
su
ffi
ci
en
tly
co
m
pl
ex
to
ch
al
le
ng
e
st
ud
en
ts
’ t
hi
nk
in
g.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r
m
on
ito
rs
st
ud
en
ts
a
s t
he
y
w
or
k
co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
el
y.
Co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
e
w
or
k
is
su
ffi
ci
en
tly

co
m
pl
ex
to
a
llo
w
st
ud
en
ts
a
n
op
po
rtu
ni
ty
to
u
se
a
v
ar
ie
ty
o
f
re
so
ur
ce
s t
o
cr
ea
tiv
el
y
ap
pl
y
th
ei
r
kn
ow
le
dg
e;
th
e
ta
sk
ch
al
le
ng
es

st
ud
en
ts
’ t
hi
nk
in
g.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r
m
on
ito
rs
g
ro
up
s’
pr
og
re
ss
in
th
e
ev
en
t
th
at
th
e
ta
sk
m
ig
ht
n
ee
d
ad
ju
st
m
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
d
es
ig
n
co
lla
bo
ra
tiv
e
w
or
k
th
at
is
su
ffi
ci
en
tly
co
m
pl
ex
to

al
lo
w
st
ud
en
ts
a
n
op
po
rtu
ni
ty
to
u
se
a

va
rie
ty
o
f r
es
ou
rc
es
to
cr
ea
tiv
el
y
ap
pl
y
th
ei
r k
no
w
le
dg
e.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts

co
lle
gu
es
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
m
on
ito
r
gr
ou
ps
’ p
ro
gr
es
s i
n
th
e
ev
en
t t
ha
t t
he

ta
sk
m
ig
ht
n
ee
d
ad
ju
st
m
en
t.
3.
3c
: L
an
gu
ag
e
su
pp
or
t
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

pr
ov
id
e
la
ng
ua
ge
su
pp
or
t
to
st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s g
en
er
ic
w
rit
te
n,

ve
rb
al
, t
ea
ch
er
, o
r p
ee
r s
up
po
rts
fo
r
al
l s
tu
de
nt
s,
w
ith
ou
t a
tte
nd
in
g
to

di
ffe
re
nt
ia
te
d
ne
ed
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s d
iff
er
en
tia
te
d
w
rit
te
n,
v
er
ba
l,
te
ac
he
r,
or
p
ee
r
su
pp
or
ts
to
b
oo
st
in
di
vi
du
al
st
ud
en
ts
’
ac
ad
em
ic
la
ng
ua
ge
u
sa
ge
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
ro
vi
de
d
iff
er
en
tia
te
d
w
rit
te
n,
v
er
ba
l,
te
ac
he
r,
or
p
ee
r
su
pp
or
ts
to
b
oo
st
in
di
vi
du
al
st
ud
en
ts
’
ac
ad
em
ic
la
ng
ua
ge
u
sa
ge
.
3 . I N S T R U C T I N G W I T H I N T E N T I O N
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 176IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 176 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Appendix | 177
4
.1
:
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
to
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
4.
1a
:
Co
m
pr
eh
en
si
bl
e
ex
pe
ct
at
io
ns

Th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
e
xp
ec
ta
tio
ns

ar
e
no
t u
nd
er
st
oo
d
by

st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
e
xp
ec
ta
tio
ns
a
re

co
m
m
un
ic
at
ed
to
st
ud
en
ts
, b
ut
th
e
m
aj
or
ity
o
f s
tu
de
nt
s a
re
o
nl
y
pa
rti
al
ly

ab
le
to
e
xp
la
in
o
r d
em
on
st
ra
te
w
ha
t
th
ey
a
re
le
ar
ni
ng
, w
hy
th
ey
a
re

le
ar
ni
ng
th
e
co
nt
en
t,
an
d
ho
w
th
ey

w
ill
k
no
w
th
ey
h
av
e
le
ar
ne
d
it.
Th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
e
xp
ec
ta
tio
ns
a
re
cl
ea
rly

co
m
m
un
ic
at
ed
a
nd
u
nd
er
st
oo
d
by

st
ud
en
ts
su
ch
th
at
m
os
t r
an
do
m
ly

se
le
ct
ed
st
ud
en
ts
ca
n
ex
pl
ai
n
or

de
m
on
st
ra
te
w
ha
t t
he
y
ar
e
le
ar
ni
ng
,
w
hy
th
ey
a
re
le
ar
ni
ng
th
e
co
nt
en
t,
an
d
ho
w
th
ey
w
ill
k
no
w
th
ey
h
av
e

le
ar
ne
d
it.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
co
nv
ey
co
m
pr
eh
en
si
bl
e
le
ar
ni
ng
e
xp
ec
ta
tio
ns
su
ch
th
at
m
os
t
ra
nd
om
ly
se
le
ct
ed
st
ud
en
ts
ca
n
ex
pl
ai
n
or
d
em
on
st
ra
te
w
ha
t t
he
y
ar
e
le
ar
ni
ng
, w
hy
th
ey
a
re
le
ar
ni
ng
th
e
co
nt
en
t,
an
d
ho
w
th
ey
w
ill
k
no
w
th
ey

ha
ve
le
ar
ne
d
it.
4.
1b
: G
oa
l-s
et
tin
g
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

pr
ov
id
e
go
al
-s
et
tin
g
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s t
o
st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s g
oa
l-s
et
tin
g
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s b
ut
o
nl
y
pr
om
pt
s
st
ud
en
ts
to
u
se
th
em
su
m
m
at
iv
el
y
(e
nd
o
f p
ro
je
ct
o
r a
ss
ig
nm
en
t),
th
us

lim
iti
ng
st
ud
en
ts
’ a
bi
lit
y
to
m
ea
su
re

pr
og
re
ss
fo
rm
at
iv
el
y.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s c
le
ar
a
nd

fo
cu
se
d
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s f
or
st
ud
en
ts
to

se
t a
nd
g
au
ge
th
ei
r p
ro
gr
es
s t
ow
ar
d
ac
hi
ev
em
en
t o
f g
oa
ls
re
la
te
d
to

le
ar
ni
ng
a
nd
m
as
te
ry
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
ro
vi
de
cl
ea
r a
nd

fo
cu
se
d
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s f
or
st
ud
en
ts
to

se
t a
nd
g
au
ge
th
ei
r p
ro
gr
es
s t
ow
ar
d
ac
hi
ev
em
en
t o
f g
oa
ls
re
la
te
d
to

le
ar
ni
ng
a
nd
m
as
te
ry
.
4 . A S S E S S I N G W I T H A S Y S T E M
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 177IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 177 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

178 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
4
.2
:
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
to
M
o
n
it
o
r
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
4.
2a
: C
he
ck
s f
or

un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

ch
ec
k
fo
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
po
ra
di
ca
lly
ch
ec
ks

fo
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
, u
si
ng
a
li
m
ite
d
re
pe
rto
ire
o
f
te
ch
ni
qu
es
to
d
o
so
. O
pp
or
tu
ni
tie
s
to
ch
ec
k
fo
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
a
re
o
fte
n
ov
er
lo
ok
ed
, a
nd
th
e
te
ac
he
r r
el
ie
s
pr
im
ar
ily
o
n
an
ec
do
ta
l i
nf
or
m
at
io
n
ab
ou
t s
tu
de
nt
p
ro
gr
es
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
ys
te
m
at
ic
al
ly
ch
ec
ks
fo
r
st
ud
en
t u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
, u
si
ng
a
v
ar
ie
ty
o
f t
ec
hn
iq
ue
s,
w
hi
ch
m
ay
in
cl
ud
e
th
e
fo
llo
w
in
g:
•
O
ra
l l
an
gu
ag
e
(q
ue
st
io
ni
ng
,
re
te
lli
ng
, s
tu
de
nt
co
nv
er
sa
tio
n)
•
St
ud
en
t w
rit
in
g
•
St
ud
en
t p
ro
je
ct
s/
pe
rfo
rm
an
ce
s
•
Te
st
s/
qu
iz
ze
s/
co
m
m
on
a
ss
es
sm
en
ts
•
St
ud
en
t s
el
f-a
ss
es
sm
en
t
Th
e
te
ac
he
r u
se
s t
he
se
ch
ec
ks
fo
r
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g
to
g
au
ge
p
ro
gr
es
s o
f
in
di
vi
du
al
s a
nd
g
ro
up
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
sy
st
em
at
ic
al
ly
ch
ec
k
fo
r
st
ud
en
t u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng
th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
le
ss
on
, u
si
ng
a
v
ar
ie
ty
o
f t
ec
hn
iq
ue
s,
w
hi
ch
m
ay
in
cl
ud
e
th
e
fo
llo
w
in
g:
•
O
ra
l l
an
gu
ag
e
(q
ue
st
io
ni
ng
,
re
te
lli
ng
, s
tu
de
nt
co
nv
er
sa
tio
n)
•
St
ud
en
t w
rit
in
g
•
St
ud
en
t p
ro
je
ct
s/
pe
rfo
rm
an
ce
s
•
Te
st
s/
qu
iz
ze
s/
co
m
m
on
a
ss
es
sm
en
ts
•
St
ud
en
t s
el
f-a
ss
es
sm
en
t
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
u
se
th
es
e
ch
ec
ks
fo
r
un
de
rs
ta
nd
in
g
to
g
au
ge
p
ro
gr
es
s o
f
in
di
vi
du
al
s a
nd
g
ro
up
s.
4.
2b
: E
rr
or
a
na
ly
si
s
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

an
al
yz
e
st
ud
en
t e
rr
or
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r a
na
ly
ze
s s
tu
de
nt
e
rr
or
s,
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, a
nd
m
is
cu
es
b
ut
d
oe
s
no
t l
in
k
th
es
e
fi n
di
ng
s t
o
fe
ed
ba
ck
o
r
fu
tu
re
in
st
ru
ct
io
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
tra
te
gi
ca
lly
a
na
ly
ze
s
st
ud
en
t e
rr
or
s,
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, a
nd

m
is
cu
es
to
p
ro
vi
de
m
or
e
ac
cu
ra
te

an
d
sp
ec
ifi
c f
ee
db
ac
k
an
d
fu
tu
re

in
st
ru
ct
io
n
to
st
ud
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
st
ra
te
gi
ca
lly
a
na
ly
ze

st
ud
en
t e
rr
or
s,
m
is
co
nc
ep
tio
ns
, a
nd

m
is
cu
es
in
o
rd
er
to
p
ro
vi
de
m
or
e
ac
cu
ra
te
a
nd
sp
ec
ifi
c f
ee
db
ac
k
an
d
fu
tu
re
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
to
st
ud
en
ts
.
4 . A S S E S S I N G W I T H A S Y S T E M
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 178IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 178 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Appendix | 179
4
.3
:
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
to
I
n
fo
r
m
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
ia
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
4.
3a
: T
yp
es
o
f
fe
ed
ba
ck
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

pr
ov
id
e
di
ffe
re
nt
ty
pe
s o
f
fe
ed
ba
ck
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s f
ee
db
ac
k
ab
ou
t
th
e
ta
sk
, a
bo
ut
th
e
pr
oc
es
se
s o
f t
he

ta
sk
, a
nd
a
bo
ut
se
lf-
re
gu
la
tio
n,
b
ut

th
es
e
fe
ed
ba
ck
o
ffe
rin
gs
m
ay
n
ot
b
e
sc
al
ed
to
m
at
ch
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
p
ro
gr
es
s
of
th
e
st
ud
en
t.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
ilu
te
s t
he

fe
ed
ba
ck
w
ith
p
ra
is
e.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
el
ec
ts
th
e
ty
pe
o
f
fe
ed
ba
ck
m
os
t c
on
du
ci
ve
to
p
ro
vi
di
ng

st
ud
en
ts
w
ith
a
cl
ea
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng

of
h
ow
th
ey
a
re
d
oi
ng
re
la
tiv
e
to
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
g
oa
l,
pr
ov
id
in
g
pr
og
re
ss
iv
e
fe
ed
ba
ck
•
ab
ou
t t
he
ta
sk
,
•
ab
ou
t p
ro
ce
ss
in
g
of
th
e
ta
sk
, a
nd
•
ab
ou
t s
el
f-r
eg
ul
at
io
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r k
ee
ps
p
ra
is
e
se
pa
ra
te
fr
om

fe
ed
ba
ck
to
in
cr
ea
se
it
s e
ffe
ct
iv
en
es
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
se
le
ct
th
e
ty
pe
o
f
fe
ed
ba
ck
m
os
t c
on
du
ci
ve
to
p
ro
vi
di
ng

st
ud
en
ts
w
ith
a
cl
ea
r u
nd
er
st
an
di
ng

of
h
ow
th
ey
a
re
d
oi
ng
re
la
tiv
e
to
th
e
le
ar
ni
ng
g
oa
l,
pr
ov
id
in
g
pr
og
re
ss
iv
e
fe
ed
ba
ck
•
ab
ou
t t
he
ta
sk
,
•
ab
ou
t p
ro
ce
ss
in
g
of
th
e
ta
sk
, a
nd
•
ab
ou
t s
el
f-r
eg
ul
at
io
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
k
ee
p
pr
ai
se
se
pa
ra
te

fro
m
fe
ed
ba
ck
to
in
cr
ea
se
it
s
ef
fe
ct
iv
en
es
s.
4.
3b
: U
se
fu
ln
es
s o
f
fe
ed
ba
ck
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

pr
ov
id
e
us
ef
ul
fe
ed
ba
ck
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r p
ro
vi
de
s s
tu
de
nt
s w
ith

fe
ed
ba
ck
th
at
is
d
im
in
is
he
d
in
it
s
ef
fe
ct
iv
en
es
s b
ec
au
se
it
is
d
el
ay
ed
,
va
gu
e,
in
co
m
pr
eh
en
si
bl
e
to
th
e
le
ar
ne
r,
or
d
oe
s n
ot
a
llo
w
fo
r t
he

le
ar
ne
r t
o
ta
ke
a
ct
io
n.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
uc
ce
ss
fu
lly
p
ro
vi
de
s
st
ud
en
ts
w
ith
fe
ed
ba
ck
th
at
is

tim
el
y,
sp
ec
ifi
c,
un
de
rs
ta
nd
ab
le
, a
nd

ac
tio
na
bl
e.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
p
ro
vi
de
st
ud
en
ts

w
ith
fe
ed
ba
ck
th
at
is
ti
m
el
y,
sp
ec
ifi
c,
un
de
rs
ta
nd
ab
le
, a
nd
a
ct
io
na
bl
e.
4.
3c
: N
ee
ds
-b
as
ed

in
st
ru
ct
io
n
Th
e
te
ac
he
r d
oe
s n
ot

al
te
r i
ns
tru
ct
io
n
ba
se
d
on

st
ud
en
t n
ee
ds
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r r
el
ie
s o
n
in
iti
al
in
st
ru
ct
io
n,

w
ith
li
m
ite
d
op
po
rtu
ni
tie
s f
or

re
te
ac
hi
ng
a
t i
nd
iv
id
ua
l a
nd
sm
al
l-
gr
ou
p
le
ve
ls
. N
ee
ds
-b
as
ed
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
oc
cu
rs
a
t t
im
es
, b
ut
th
e
te
ac
he
r r
el
ie
s
on
im
pr
es
si
on
s r
at
he
r t
ha
n
da
ta
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r o
rg
an
iz
es
in
di
vi
du
al
,
sm
al
l-g
ro
up
, a
nd
w
ho
le
-c
la
ss

in
st
ru
ct
io
n
ba
se
d
on
tr
en
d
da
ta
a
nd

m
at
ch
es
st
ud
en
ts
w
ith
th
e
sp
ec
ifi
c
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
th
at
th
ey
n
ee
d
to
p
ro
gr
es
s
ac
ad
em
ic
al
ly
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r a
bi
lit
y
to
o
rg
an
iz
e
in
di
vi
du
al
,
sm
al
l-g
ro
up
, a
nd
w
ho
le
-c
la
ss

in
st
ru
ct
io
n
ba
se
d
on
tr
en
d
da
ta
a
nd

m
at
ch
st
ud
en
ts
w
ith
th
e
sp
ec
ifi
c
in
st
ru
ct
io
n
th
at
th
ey
n
ee
d
to
p
ro
gr
es
s
ac
ad
em
ic
al
ly
.
4 . A S S E S S I N G W I T H A S Y S T E M
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 179IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 179 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

180 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
5
.1
:
S
h
o
r
t-
T
e
r
m
E
v
id
e
n
c
e
o
f
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
io
n
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
5.
1:
S
ho
rt-
te
rm

ev
id
en
ce
o
f p
ro
gr
es
s
to
w
ar
d
pe
rio
di
c g
oa
ls

St
ud
en
ts
co
ns
is
te
nt
ly
d
o
no
t m
ee
t p
er
io
di
c g
oa
ls

th
ro
ug
ho
ut
th
e
sc
ho
ol

ye
ar
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r i
s o
nl
y
oc
ca
si
on
al
ly
a
bl
e
to
d
em
on
st
ra
te
im
pa
ct
o
n
st
ud
en
t
le
ar
ni
ng
m
ea
su
re
d
ac
ro
ss
u
ni
ts
o
f
st
ud
y.
Ev
id
en
ce
is
d
ra
w
n
fro
m
li
m
ite
d
so
ur
ce
s.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r c
on
si
st
en
tly
d
em
on
st
ra
te
s
si
gn
ifi
ca
nt
im
pa
ct
o
n
st
ud
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
m
ea
su
re
d
ac
ro
ss
u
ni
ts
o
f s
tu
dy
, w
ith

ev
id
en
ce
d
ra
w
n
fro
m
a
w
id
e
va
rie
ty

of
so
ur
ce
s,
in
cl
ud
in
g
va
lid
a
nd

re
lia
bl
e
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
a
s
w
el
l a
s o
bs
er
va
tio
ns
a
nd
fo
rm
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s
in
th
ei
r w
or
k
w
ith
st
ud
en
ts
su
ch

th
at
th
ey
a
re
a
bl
e
to
d
em
on
st
ra
te

im
pa
ct
o
n
st
ud
en
t l
ea
rn
in
g
m
ea
su
re
d
ac
ro
ss
u
ni
ts
o
f s
tu
dy
, w
ith

ev
id
en
ce
d
ra
w
n
fro
m
a
w
id
e
va
rie
ty

of
so
ur
ce
s,
in
cl
ud
in
g
va
lid
a
nd

re
lia
bl
e
su
m
m
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
a
s
w
el
l a
s o
bs
er
va
tio
ns
a
nd
fo
rm
at
iv
e
as
se
ss
m
en
ts
.
5
.2
:
L
o
n
g
-T
e
r
m
E
v
id
e
n
c
e
o
f
L
e
a
r
n
in
g
Cr
it
er
io
n
N
ot
Y
et
A
pp
ar
en
t
D
ev
el
op
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
Le
ad
in
g
5.
2:
Lo
ng
-te
rm

ev
id
en
ce
o
f
at
ta
in
m
en
t o
f t
ra
ns
fe
r
go
al
s
St
ud
en
ts
co
ns
is
te
nt
ly

do
n
ot
m
ee
t l
on
g-
te
rm

tra
ns
fe
r g
oa
ls
.
St
ud
en
ts
in
co
ns
is
te
nt
ly
m
ee
t l
on
g-
te
rm
tr
an
sf
er
g
oa
ls
, o
r t
he
te
ac
he
r
do
es
n
ot
se
t c
ha
lle
ng
in
g
bu
t
ac
hi
ev
ab
le
g
oa
ls
.
M
os
t s
tu
de
nt
s c
on
si
st
en
tly
m
ee
t
ch
al
le
ng
in
g
bu
t a
ch
ie
va
bl
e
lo
ng
-te
rm

tra
ns
fe
r g
oa
ls
.
Th
e
te
ac
he
r s
up
po
rts
co
lle
ag
ue
s i
n
th
ei
r w
or
k
w
ith
st
ud
en
ts
su
ch
th
at

m
os
t o
f t
he
st
ud
en
ts
m
ee
t c
ha
lle
ng
in
g
bu
t a
ch
ie
va
bl
e
lo
ng
-te
rm
tr
an
sf
er

go
al
s.
5 . I M PA C T I N G S T U D E N T L E A R N I N G
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 180IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 180 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

181
References
Ainsworth, L. (2015). Common formative assessments 2.0: How teacher teams intentionally align standards,
instruction, and assessment. Th ousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
American Statistical Association. (2014). ASA statement on using value-added models for educational assessment.
Retrieved from https://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement
Ashman, A. F., & Gillies, R. M. (1997). Children’s cooperative behavior and interactions in trained and untrained
work groups in regular classrooms. Journal of School Psychology, 35(3), 261–279.
Asiyai, R. (2014). Students’ perception of the condition of their classroom physical learning environment and its
impact on their learning and motivation. College Student Journal, 48(4), 716–726.
Ballou, D., & Springer, M. G. (2015). Using student test scores to measure teacher performance: Some problems in
the design and implementation of evaluation systems. Educational Researcher, 44(2), 77–86.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy
and Practice, 5(1), 7–73.
Block, P. (2008). Community: Th e structure of belonging. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Brattesani, K. A.,Weinstein, R. S., & Marshall, H. H. (1984). Student perceptions of diff erential teacher treatment as
moderators of teacher expectation eff ects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2), 236–247.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms.
In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement:
Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. A. (2012). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it
right—using it well. Boston: Pearson.
Clay, M. M. (2000). Running records for classroom teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Costello, B., Wachtel, J., & Wachtel, T. (2009). Restorative practices handbook for teachers, disciplinarians, and
administrators. Bethlehem, PA: International Institute for Restorative Practices.
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for eff ectiveness and
improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Davis, T. (2013). McREL’s Research-Based Teacher Evaluation System. Denver, CO: McREL International.
Denton, P. (2007). Th e power of our words: Teacher language that helps children learn. Turners Falls, MA: Northeast
Foundation for Children Inc.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 181IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 181 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

https://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement

http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000

182 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for
improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
DuFour, R., & Marzano, R. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders improve student
achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: Th e new psychology of success. New York: Random House.
Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Powers, K. (2006). School reform and standards-based education: A model for English-
language learners. Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 195–210.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34,
169–189.
Epstein, J. L., et al. (2009). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action (3rd ed.).
Th ousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010a). Enhancing RTI: How to ensure success with eff ective classroom instruction and
intervention. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010b). Unpacking the language purpose: Vocabulary, structure, and function. TESOL
Journal, 1(3), 315–337.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2011). Th e purposeful classroom: How to structure lessons with learning goals in mind.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014a). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of
responsibility (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014b). Checking for understanding: Formative assessment techniques for your classroom
(2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014c). Using teacher learning walks to improve instruction. Principal Leadership, 14(5),
58–61.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Pumpian, I. (2011, November). No penalties for practice. Educational Leadership, 69(3),
46–51.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Rothenberg, C. (2008). Content area conversations: How to plan discussion-based lessons for
diverse language learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010, October). Identifying instructional moves during guided instruction. Th e Reading
Teacher, 64(2), 84–95.
Gess-Newsome, J. (2013). Pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International
guide to student achievement (pp. 257–259). New York: Routledge.
Glazerman, S., Goldhaber, D., Loeb, S., Raudenbush, S., Staiger, D., & Whitehurst, G. (2010). Evaluating teachers:
Th e important role of value-added. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of
teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools.
Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877–896.
Goldhaber, D. (2015). Exploring the potential of value-added performance measures to aff ect the quality of the
teacher workforce. Educational Researcher, 87(2), 87–95.
Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (2007). Looking in classrooms (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Goodenow, C. (1993). Th e psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and
educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90.
Guskey, T. R. (2013). Defi ning student achievement. In J. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to
student achievement (pp. 3–6). New York: Routledge.
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York: Routledge.
Heubusch, J. D., & Lloyd, J. W. (1998). Corrective feedback in oral reading. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8(1),
63–79.
Hiebert, J., Morris, A. K., Berk, D., & Jansen, A. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of
Teacher Education, 58(1), 47–61.
Hintz, A., & Kazemi, E. (2014, November). Talking about math. Educational Leadership, 72(3), 36–40.
Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and criterion-related validity of achievement goals in predicting academic
achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 48–73.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina,
MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, S. M. (2015). Will VAMs reinforce the walls of the egg-crate school? Educational Researcher, 44(2),
117–126.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 182IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 182 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

References | 183
Johnston, P. H. (2004). Choice words: How our language aff ects children’s learning. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Joint Committee on the Standards for Educational and Psychology Testing of the American Educational
Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement
in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.
Kelley, T. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. New York: Macmillan.
Lippman, P. C. (2013). Collaborative spaces. T.H.E. Journal, 40(1), 32–37.
Marshall, K. (2011). Teacher evaluation rubrics. Available: http://www.marshallmemo.com/articles/Marshall%20
Teacher%20Eval%20Rubrics%20Aug.%2031,%2011
Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2006). Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A
construct validity approach. Psychology in the Schools, 43(3), 267–281.
Marzano, R. J. (2013). Th e Marzano teacher evaluation model. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies
for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
McMahon, S. D., Wernsman, J., & Rose, D. S. (2009). Th e relation of classroom environment and school belonging
to academic self-effi cacy among urban fourth- and fi fth-grade students. Elementary School Journal, 109(3),
267–281.
McTighe, J. (2014). Long-term transfer goals. Retrieved from http://jaymctighe.com/wordpress/wp-content/
uploads/2013/04/Long-term-Transfer-Goals
Morisano, D., & Locke, E. A. (2013). Goal setting and academic achievement. In J. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.),
International guide to student achievement (pp. 45–50). New York: Routledge.
Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. (2003). Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational
Research Journal, 40(4), 905–928.
National Research Council, Committee on How People Learn: A Targeted Report for Teachers. (2005). How students
learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
New Zealand Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Success criteria. Retrieved from http://assessment.tki.org.nz/Glossary/
Success-criteria
Oliveira, A., Wilcox, K., Angelis, J., Applebee, A. N., Amodeo, V., & Snyder, M. A. (2013). Best practice in middle-
school science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(2), 297–322.
Olweus, D. (2003). A profi le of bullying at school. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 12–17.
Pai, H., Sears, D., & Maeda, Y. (2015). Eff ects of small-group learning on transfer: A meta-analysis. Educational
Psychology Review, 27(1), 79–102.
Paley, V. G. (1992). You can’t say you can’t play. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-
monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117–175.
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, G. (1983). Th e gradual release of responsibility model of instruction. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 8, 112–123.
Pianta, R. C., Belsky, J., Houts, R., & Morrison, F. (2007). Opportunities to learn in America’s elementary
classrooms. Science, 315, 1795–1796.
Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom assessment scoring system (K–3). Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes.
Popham, W. J. (2013). Evaluating America’s teachers: Mission possible? Th ousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Posner, G. J. (1994). Analyzing the curriculum (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Potter, S., & Davis, B. H. (2003). A fi rst-year teacher implements class meetings. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 39(2),
88–90.
Roediger, H., III. (2014). Th e science of successful learning. Educational Leadership, 72(2), 42–46.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2),
119–144.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (1998). Because we can change the world: A practical guide to building cooperative, inclusive
classroom communities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review,
57(1), 1–22.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 183IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 183 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.marshallmemo.com/articles/Marshall%20Teacher%20Eval%20Rubrics%20Aug.%2031,%2011

http://assessment.tki.org.nz/Glossary/Success-criteria

184 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
Smith, D., Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2015). Better than carrots or sticks: Restorative practices for positive classroom
management. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Stronge, J., & Tucker, P. D. (2003). Handbook on teacher evaluation: Assessing and improving instruction. London:
Eye on Education.
TED (Producer). (2012). Use data to build better schools [Video fi le]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/
andreas_schleicher_use_data_to_build_better_schools
Tekkumru Kisa, M., & Stein, M. K. (2015). Learning to see teaching in new ways: A foundation for maintaining
cognitive demand. American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 105–136.
Todd, R. J. (2015). Evidence-based practice and school libraries. Knowledge Quest, 43(3), 8–15.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000, August). Diff erentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. ERIC Digest. Champaign,
IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Identifi er: ED443572)
Tomlinson, C. A. (2015, January 28). Diff erentiation does, in fact, work. Education Week, 34(19), 26, 32.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a diff erentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2014). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaff olding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom
interactions. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Huitsing, G., Sainio, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). Th e role of teachers in bullying:
Th e relation between antibullying attitudes, effi cacy, and eff orts to reduce bullying. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 106(4), 1135–1143.
Viadero, D. (2010, January 27). Chicago study teases out keys to improvement. Education Week, 29(19), 1, 9.
Webb, N. L. (2002). Alignment study in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies of state standards
and assessments for four states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Offi cers.
Whitehurst, G. J., Chingos, M. W., & Lindquist, K. M. (2015). Getting classroom observations right. Education
Next, 15(1). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/getting-classroom-observations-right/
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wiliam, D. (2006). Does assessment hinder learning? Princeton, NJ: ETS Global Institute. Retrieved from http://
www.dylanwiliam.org
Yamauchi, L. A., Lau-Smith, J., & Luning, R. I. (2008). Family involvement in a Hawaiian language immersion
program. School Community Journal, 18(1), 39–60.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 184IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 184 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.dylanwiliam.org

Getting 
Classroom 
Observations 
Right

185
Index
Notes: Th e letter f following a page number denotes a fi gure. Numerical references to FIT Teaching Tool
components, factors, and ingredients are included in parentheses.
academic risk taking, encouraging
(2.2b)
examples, 66–69
grades and, 67
growth mindset, 66–67
rubric, 66, 173
accountability in positive interac-
tions, 103
achievement, goal setting and, 120
achievement gap, 48
agency
building (2.2a), 61–66, 172
meaning of, 62–63
assessment. See also Evidence of
Learning (1.2); understanding,
checking for (4.2a)
benchmark tests, 147f
criterion- and norm- referenced
tests, 147f, 151
diff erentiation-based, 42–43
end-of-course exams, 152
FIT Teaching rating scale, 8–11
large-scale, misapplication of,
143, 151
performance portfolios, 152
standardized tests, 151
teacher-created, usefulness of,
146–147
of teacher quality, 8–14,
151–152
trustworthy tools for, 153–154
Assessment to Inform Learning
(4.3)
feedback, types of (4.3a),
133–136, 179
feedback, usefulness of (4.3b),
136–138, 179
ingredients, 167
needs-based instruction (4.3c),
138–141, 179
Assessment to Monitor Learning
(4.2)
error analysis (4.2b), 129–132,
131f, 178
ingredients, 167
time vs. learning constant,
122–123
understanding, checking for
(4.2a), 123–129
Assessment to Support Learners
(4.1)
conditional actions, 117
elements underlying,
117–118
expectations, comprehensible
(4.1a), 117–119
goal setting, 117
goal-setting opportunities
(4.1b), 119–122
ingredients, 167
purpose statements, 117
trail marker analogy, 117
Assessment with a System (com-
ponent 4). See also specifi c
factors
Assessment to Inform Learn-
ing factor (4.3), 133–141
Assessment to Monitor Learn-
ing factor (4.2), 123–132
Assessment to Support Learn-
ers factor (4.1), 117–122
factors, 167
focus, 6
ingredients, 7f, 167
introduction, 115–116
learner’s position in, 115
requirements, 115
summary overview, 141
assessment tools, trustworthy,
153–154
audience-response systems
(clickers), 124
background knowledge, 100
behaviors, problematic, 63–64
belongingness, 47
bulletin boards, 52
bullying, 70
circles, 56
circulation patterns, classroom,
52
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 185IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 185 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

186 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
classrooms. See also Cultivating a
Learning Climate (component 2)
class meetings, 55, 56f
community building outside
the (2.1c), 56
lesson-specifi c learning (1.1c),
23–26, 170
classrooms, effi cient; see Effi cient
learning climate (2.3)
classrooms, environmental factors
color, 52
common and individual spaces,
52
décor, 52
examples, 51–54
furniture arrangements, 52
movement and circulation pat-
terns, 52
rubric, 51, 172
signage / bulletin boards, 52
social aspect and physical lay-
out, 51–54
clickers (audience-response sys-
tems), 124
collaboration. See also Collabora-
tive Learning (3.3)
community building (2.1c),
58–60
FIT Teaching recognition of,
10
refl ection and, 13
success criteria, identifying
(1.2), 35–36
Collaborative Learning (3.3)
benefi ts, 102–103
in gradual release of responsi-
bility model, 82f
ingredients, 167
interactions, developing posi-
tive, 103–104
language support (3.3c), 111–
113, 176
learning routines, interactive
(3.3a), 103–107, 176
phases, focus of, 82
success prerequisites, 104
task complexity (3.3b), 107–
111, 108f
communication
in collaborative learning,
104
for community building
(2.1c), 58–59
purposeful talk, 104
small-group, 112
community building (2.1c)
circles, 56
class meetings, 55, 56f
collaboration for, 58–60
communication for, 58–59
dimensions, 55
examples, 54–60
family partnership practices,
56–57
outside the classroom, 56
peer relationships, 58–60
repairing harm and, 69
rubric, 54, 172
between and with students,
58–59
welcoming learning climate in
(2.1), 54–60, 56f, 69, 172
confl ict resolution, 70–71
Consortium on Chicago School
Research, 45
content, accurate representation of
critical (3.1c)
demonstration, 92f
examples, 91–95
lecture, 92f
modeling approach, 92f
read aloud, 92f
rubric, 91, 174
think-aloud skills, 92, 93f, 94
video viewing, 92f
content diff erentiation, 42
content learning intentions, identi-
fying (1.1d)
examples, 26–28
rubric, 26, 170
cues, environmental, gestural, ver-
bal, and visual, 101
Cultivating a Learning Climate
(component 2). See also learning
climate, specifi c factors
cultivating, term meaning, 45
Effi cient factor (2.3), 74–79
factors, 167
focus, 5–6
Growth Producing factor (2.2),
61–73
ingredients, 7f, 167
introduction, 45–46
social aspect, 70
summary overview, 79–80
Welcoming factor (2.1),
47–60
data management, 1–2, 77–78
décor, classroom, 52
Developing growth level, 9, 11
diff erentiation
dimensions, 42
of expectations, 48
in expectations, 48
planning for (1.3b), 41–43,
171
planning for in meaningful
learning (1.3b), 41–43, 171
student needs, noticing (3.2a),
42
diff erentiation-based assessment,
42–43
Effi cient learning climate (2.3)
classroom management prac-
tices, 73
ingredients, 167
record keeping (2.3b), 77–79,
173
rules, routines, and procedures
(2.3a), 74–77, 173
engagement for meaningful learn-
ing, 38
environmental factors, classroom
(2.1b)
color, 52
common and individual spaces,
52
décor, 52
examples, 51–54
furniture arrangements, 52
movement and circulation pat-
terns, 52
rubric, 51, 172
signage / bulletin boards, 52
social aspect and physical lay-
out, 51–54
equality in education, 48
error analysis (4.2b)
errors, types of, 129–130
examples, 129–132
misconceptions, 130
mistakes vs. errors, 129
rubric, 129, 178
error-coding form (example),
131f
errors
factual, 129
feedback and, 115
mistakes vs., 129
procedural, 129
transformational, 129–130
evidence-based practice,
143–145
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 186IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 186 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Index | 187
evidence-collection, designing
(1.2b), 36–38, 171
Evidence of Learning (1.2)
evidence-collection, designing
(1.2b), 36–38, 171
focus, 33
ingredients, 167
success criteria, identifying
(1.2a), 33–36, 82, 82f, 171
expectations
comprehensible (4.1a), 118–
119, 177
diff erentiated, 48
expert blind spot, 96
face-to-face interactions, 103
fail forward, 115
family partnership practices,
56–57
feedback
about the process, 134
about the self as a person,
134
about the task, 133–134
error’s role in, 115
examples, 133–136
maximizing, 132–133
rubric, 133, 179
on self-regulation, 134
types of (4.3a), 133–136, 179
usefulness of (4.3b), 136–138,
179
FIT Teaching (Framework for
Intentional and Targeted Teach-
ing), 3–4
FIT Teaching Tool (FIT Teaching
and Growth and Leadership
Tool)
assumptions underlying,
8–11
components, 5–7, 7f, 167. See
also specifi c components
ingredients, 167
leading, 10
overview, 167
growth levels, 8–11, 168–169
purpose, 7–8
rubrics, 168–169. See also spe-
cifi c ingredients
structure, 6–7, 167
Focused Instruction (3.1)
content, accurate representa-
tion of critical (3.1c), 91–95,
92f, 93f
examples, 84–95
Focused Instruction (3.1)
(continued)
gradual release of responsibility
model, 82f
ingredients, 167
learning intentions, clear
(3.1a), 84–90, 174
learning intentions, relevant
(3.1b), 10, 87–91, 174
phase focus, 81
framework, term meaning, 3
furniture arrangements, class-
room, 52
goals
approach goals, 120
performance goals, 120
short-term evidence of prog-
ress toward (5.1), 145–150,
147f, 180
student-developed, 134
goal setting
achievement and, 120
formative/summative, 117
motivation and, 120
opportunities for (4.1b), 119–
122, 177
grade books, electronic, 77–78
grades, 67
gradual release of responsibility
model, 81–82, 82f
growth mindset, 66–67
Growth Producing learning cli-
mate (2.2)
academic risk taking, encour-
aging(2.2b), 66–69, 173
agency and identity, building
(2.2a), 61–66, 172
harm, repairing (2.2c), 69–73,
73f, 173
ingredients, 167
teacher attitudes and actions
in, 60–61
Guided Instruction (3.2)
examples, 94–102
expert blind spot, 96
gradual release of responsibility
model, 82f
ingredients, 167
phase focus, 81–82
requirements for, 95–96
scaff olds (3.2b), 99–102, 109,
175
student needs, noticing (3.2a),
96–99, 175
harm, repairing (2.2c)
bullying, 70
community building for, 69
confl ict resolution, 70–71
examples, 69–73
prompts for, 73f
restorative practices princi-
ples, 70
rubric, 69, 173
homework, 123–124
identity, building (2.2a)
examples, 61–66
rubric, 61, 172
identity, meaning of, 61–62
Impacting Student Learning
(component 5). See also specifi c
factors
factors, 167
focus, 6
ingredients, 7f, 167
introduction, 142–143
Long-Term factor (5.2), 150–
157, 180
Short-Term factor (5.1), 143–
150, 180
summary overview, 162–163
information management, 77–78
instruction
focused; see Focused Instruc-
tion (3.1)
guided; see Guided Instruction
(3.2)
instruction, needs-based (4.3c)
examples, 138–141
rubric, 138, 179
Instruction with Intention (com-
ponent 3). See also specifi c factors
Collaborative Learning factor
(3.3), 103–112
factors, 167
focus, 6
Focused Instruction factor
(3.1), 84–95
gradual release of responsibility
model, 81–82, 82f
Guided Instruction factor (3.2),
94–102
ingredients, 7f, 167
introduction, 81–83
summary overview, 113–114
intention. See Instruction with
Intention (component 3); Learn-
ing Intentions and Progressions
(1.1)
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 187IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 187 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

188 | Intentional and Targeted Teaching
intentional, term meaning, 3–4
intention statements, 31f
interactions, developing positive
social and academic, 103–104
interdependence, positive, 103
interpersonal skills, 104
knowledge, pedagogical content
(PCK), 81–83
language learning intentions, iden-
tifying (1.1e)
examples, 28–32
intention statements, 31f
rubric, 28, 170
language support (3.3c)
examples, 111–113
rubric, 111, 176
Leading growth level, 9–10
learning. See also Assessment to
Inform Learning (4.3)
collaborative see Collaborative
Learning (3.3)
evidence of; see Evidence of
Learning (1.2)
independent, 82, 82f
long-term evidence of; see
Long-Term Evidence of
Learning (5.2)
meaningful; see Meaningful
Learning (1.3)
primary goal of, 102
retrieval-enhanced, 124
short-term evidence of; see
Short-Term Evidence of
Learning (5.1)
learning climate
classroom management prac-
tices, 73
effi cient; see Effi cient learning
climate (2.3)
growth producing; see Growth
Producing learning climate
(2.2)
ingredients, 167
record keeping (2.3b), 77–79,
173
rules, routines, and procedures
(2.3a), 74–77, 173
welcoming; see Welcoming
learning climate (2.1)
learning intentions, clarity in (3.1a)
content and language learn-
ing, 84
establishing, 83–84
examples, 84–87
learning intentions, clarity in (3.1a)
(continued)
misuse of, 84–85
posting and discussing, 84–85
relevance and motivation
accompanying, 88–90
rubric, 84, 174
learning intentions, relevant (3.1b),
10, 87–91, 174
Learning Intentions and Progres-
sions (1.1)
content learning (1.1d), 26–28,
170
ingredients, 167
language learning (1.1e),
28–32, 31f, 170
lesson-specifi c learning (1.1c),
23–26, 170
theme, problem, project, or
question, linking to (1.1b),
20–23, 170
transfer goals, identifying
(1.1a), 17–20, 170
learning routines, interactive
(3.3a), 103–107, 176
lesson-specifi c learning (1.1c),
23–26, 170
Long-Term Evidence of Learning
(5.2)
assessment tools, trustworthy,
157–160
end-of-course exams, 152
performance portfolios, 152
teacher assessments, 151, 153f
tests, criterion- and norm-
referenced, 151–152, 153f
transfer goals, long-term evi-
dence of attainment of (5.2),
150–157
Meaningful Learning (1.3)
aligned experiences, designing
(1.3a), 39–41, 171
complexity of task in, 109
diff erentiation, planning for
(1.3b), 41–43, 171
ingredients, 167
relevance, 38
mistakes vs. errors, 129
modeling, 92f
motivation
clarity in learning intentions
and (3.1a), 88–90
goal setting and, 120
teacher, 142
movement patterns, classroom, 52
Not Yet Apparent (NYA) growth
level, 8–10
peace table, 70–71
pedagogical content knowledge
(PCK), 81–83
performance, checking for under-
standing (4.2a), 127f
Planning with Purpose (compo-
nent 1). See also specifi c factors
Evidence of Learning factor
(1.2), 33–36
factors, 7f, 167
focus, 5, 16
Intentionality in Learning fac-
tor (1.1), 17–28
introduction, 15–16
Meaningful Learning factor
(1.3), 39–41
summary overview, 43–44
Th e Power of Our Words (Denton),
65
praise, motivation and, 67
problems, linking to learning
intentions (1.1b)
examples, 20–23
rubric, 20, 170
procedures, term meaning, 74
procedures in effi cient classrooms
(2.3a)
examples, 74–77
rubric, 74, 173
process diff erentiation, 42
product diff erentiation, 42
professional development, 11
professional learning communities
(PLCs), 8, 13–14
projects
in checking for understanding
(4.2a), 127f
linking to learning intentions
(1.1b), 20–23, 170
prompts, heuristic, procedure, and
process, 100
questions
glow and grow, 112
linking to learning intentions
(1.1b), 20–23, 170
read aloud, 92f
record keeping (2.3b), 77–79, 173
refl ection, 11, 13, 115–116
refl ection prompts, 100
regard for students, positive (2.1a),
47–51, 172
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 188IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 188 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

Index | 189
relationships
positive, developing, 103–104
prompts for reestablishing, 73f
teacher-student, developing,
49–50, 58–59, 134
relevance, 10, 87–91, 174
restorative practices principles, 70
risk taking, encouraging (2.2b)
examples, 66–69
grades, 67
growth mindset, 66–67
rubric, 66, 173
routines in effi cient classrooms
(2.3a)
examples, 74–77
routines, term meaning, 74
rubric, 74, 173
rules
meaning of, 74
posting, 76
rules in effi cient classrooms (2.3a)
examples, 74–77
posting, 76
rubric, 74, 173
sarcasm, 64, 66
scaff olds (3.2b), 99–102, 109, 175
schools
culture vs. climate in, 60–61
PLCs for improving, 13
social health, elements aff ect-
ing, 45
successful, conditions present
in, 46
trust factor in improving, 9
self as person, feedback on, 134
self-regulation, feedback for, 134
Short-Term Evidence of Learning
(5.1)
benchmark tests, 147f
criterion- and norm- referenced
tests, 147f, 151
Short-Term Evidence of Learning
(5.1) (continued)
evidence-based practice,
143–145, 144f
goals, progress toward (5.1),
145–150, 147f, 180
teacher assessment, 147f
signage, in classrooms, 52
space in classrooms, common and
individual, 52
student needs, noticing (3.2a), 42,
96–99, 175
student profi les, developing, 48
students, welcoming, 47–51, 172
student-teacher relationships,
49–50, 58–59, 134
success criteria for Evidence of
Learning (1.2a)
examples, 33–36
independent learning, 82, 82f
rubric, 33, 171
targeted, term meaning, 4
task complexity in collaborative
learning (3.3b)
diffi culty vs. complexity, 107–
108, 108f
examples, 107–111
rubric, 107, 176
teachers
assessments created by, 153f
attitudes and actions in a
growth environment, 60–61
eff ective, behaviors of, 83
FIT Teaching assumptions
about, 10–11
FIT Teaching growth levels,
8–11, 168–169
motivation, 142
new, welcoming, 49
teacher-student relationships,
49–50, 58–59, 134
teaching, purpose of, 142
Teaching growth level, 9, 11
technology
grade books, electronic, 77–78
use of personal, 76
themes, linking to learning inten-
tions (1.1b), 20–23, 170
think-aloud planning sheet, 93f
think-aloud skills, 92, 94
transfer goals, identifying (1.1a),
17–20, 170
tribes, 60, 70
trust, 9, 59
understanding, checking for (4.2a)
audience-response systems
(clickers), 124
examples, 123–129
grades, 124
homework, 123–124
oral language, 125f
projects and performances, 127f
questioning, 125–126f
rubric, 123, 178
writing, 126–127f
value-added measures (VAMs),
151–152
video for representing content, 92f
vocabulary, 29
washback, 124
Welcoming learning climate (2.1)
belongingness and, 47
community building (2.1c),
54–60, 56f, 69, 172
ingredients, 167
physical environment in (2.1b),
51–54
positive regard (2.1a), 47–51,
172
school social health and, 45
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 189IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 189 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

190
About the Authors
Douglas Fisher is a professor of educational leadership at
San Diego State University and a teacher leader at Health
Sciences High & Middle College. He is a member of the
California Reading Hall of Fame and was honored as an
exemplary leader by the Conference on English Leader-
ship. He has published numerous articles on improving
student achievement, and his books include Th e Purpose-
ful Classroom: How to Structure Lessons with Learning
Goals in Mind; Enhancing RTI: How to Ensure Success with Eff ective Classroom
Instruction and Intervention; Checking for Understanding: Formative Assess-
ment Techniques for Your Classroom; How to Create a Culture of Achievement
in Your School and Classroom; and Using Data to Focus Instructional Improve-
ment. He can be reached at dfi sher@mail.sdsu.edu.
Nancy Frey is a professor of educational leadership at San
Diego State University and a teacher leader at Health
Sciences High & Middle College. Nancy is a recipient of
the Christa McAuliff e Award for Excellence in Teacher
Education from the American Association of State Colleges
and Universities and the Early Career Award from the
Literacy Research Association. She has published many
articles and books on literacy and instruction, including
Productive Group Work: How to Engage Students, Build Teamwork, and Promote
Understanding; Th e Formative Assessment Action Plan: Practical Steps to More
Successful Teaching and Learning; and Guided Instruction: How to Develop
Confi dent and Successful Learners. She can be reached at nfrey@mail.sdsu.edu.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 190IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 190 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

About the Authors | 191
Stefani Arzonetti Hite is a professional education consul-
tant who specializes in supporting systemic educational
change initiatives in schools, districts, learning associa-
tions, and state departments. Her work is primarily focused
on building teacher and administrator instructional capac-
ity, standards-based grading practices, curriculum develop-
ment, and strategic assessment strategies. She is a member
of ASCD’s FIT Teaching Cadre, wrote the ASCD white
paper “Using the FIT Teaching™ Framework for Successful
Teacher Evaluations,” and aligned the framework with major teacher evaluation
models in use across the United States. She served as deputy head (principal) of
a preK–13 international school in the United Kingdom, curriculum director for
a countywide support institution, curriculum supervisor for several school dis-
tricts in Pennsylvania, and a classroom teacher in elementary, middle, and high
school. She can be reached at stef@tigrisllc.org.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 191IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 191 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

mailto:stef@tigrisllc.org

Related ASCD Resources: FIT Teaching®
At the time of publication, the following ASCD resources were available
(ASCD stock numbers appear in parentheses). For up-to-date information
about ASCD resources, go to www.ascd.org. You can search the complete
archives of Educational Leadership at http://www.ascd.org/el.
ASCD EDge Group
Exchange ideas and connect with other educators interested in eff ective
classroom instruction, classroom management, school culture, and assessment
on the social networking site ASCD EDge® at http://ascdedge.ascd.org/
Print Products
Better Learning Th rough Structured Teaching: A Framework for the Gradual
Release of Responsibility (2nd ed.) by Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey
(#113006)
Checking for Understanding: Formative Assessment Techniques for Your
Classroom by Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey (#107023)
Th e Formative Assessment Action Plan: Practical Steps to More Eff ective
Teaching and Learning by Nancy Frey and Douglas Fisher (#111013)
Guided Instruction: How to Develop Confi dent and Successful Learners
by Nancy Frey and Douglas Fisher (#111017)
How to Create a Culture of Achievement in Your School by Douglas Fisher,
Nancy Frey, and Ian Pumpian (#111014)
Th e Purposeful Classroom: How to Structure Lessons with Learning Goals
in Mind by Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey (#112007)
Video
FIT Teaching in Action: A Framework for Intentional and Targeted Teaching
(#615055)
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 192IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 192 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org/el

http://ascdedge.ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Better-Learning-Through-Structured-Teaching-A-Framework-for-the-Gradual-Release-of-Responsibility-2nd-Edition.aspx

http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Checking-for-Understanding-Formative-Assessment-Techniques-for-Your-Classroom-2nd-Edition.aspx

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/111013.aspx

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/111017.aspx

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/111014.aspx

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/112007.aspx

http://shop.ascd.org/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductId=171585704

ASCD’s Whole Child approach is an effort to transition from
a focus on narrowly defined academic achievement to one
that promotes the long-term development and success of all
children. Through this approach, ASCD supports educators,
families, community members, and policymakers as they
move from a vision about educating the whole child to
sustainable, collaborative actions.
Place book title here
relates to (insert tenet copy here).
For more about the Whole Child approach, visit
www.wholechildeducation.org.
HEALTHY
Each student enters school
healthy and learns about and
practices a healthy lifestyle.
SAFE
Each student learns in an
environment that is physically
and emotionally safe for
students and adults.
ENGAGED
Each student is actively
engaged in learning and is
connected to the school and
broader community.
SUPPORTED
Each student has access to
personalized learning and is
supported by qualified,
caring adults.
CHALLENGED
Each student is challenged
academically and prepared
for success in college or
further study and for
employment and participation
in a global environment.
1
2
3
4
5
WHOLE CHILD
TENETS
Intentional and Targeted Teaching: A Framework for Teacher Growth
and Leadership relates to the safe, engaged, supported, and
challenged tenets.
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 193IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 193 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org

http://www.wholechildeducation.org

www.wholechildeducation.org

www.ascd.org/el
1703 North Beauregard Street
Alexandria, VA 22311-1714 USA
If you belong to a Professional Learning Community, you
may be looking for a way to get your fellow educators’
minds around a complex topic. Why not delve into a
relevant theme issue of Educational Leadership, the
journal written by educators for educators.
EDUCATIONAL
LEADERSHIP
D O N ’ T M I S S A S I N G L E I S S U E O F A S C D ’ S A W A R D – W I N N I N G M A G A Z I N E ,
Subscribe now, or buy back issues of
ASCD’s flagship publication at
www.ascd.org/ELbackissues.
Single issues cost $7 (for issues dated
September 2006–May 2013) or $8.95 (for
issues dated September 2013 and later).
Buy 10 or more of the same issue, and
you’ll save 10 percent. Buy 50 or more of
the same issue, and you’ll save 15 percent.
For discounts on purchases of 200 or more
copies, contact programteam@ascd.org;
1-800-933-2723, ext. 5773.
To see more details about these and other
popular issues of Educational Leadership,
visit www.ascd.org/ELarchive.
If you
may b
minds
releva
journa
IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 194IntentionalTargetedTeaching.indd 194 3/31/16 4:24 PM3/31/16 4:24 PM

http://www.ascd.org/ELbackissues

mailto:programteam@ascd.org

http://www.ascd.org/ELarchive

http://www.ascd.org/el

http://www.ascd.org

The Framework for Intentional and Targeted Teaching®—or FIT
Teaching®—is a research-based, field-tested, and experience-
honed process that captures the essentials of the best educational
environments. In contrast to restrictive pedagogical prescriptions
or formulas, FIT Teaching empowers teachers to adapt the most
effective planning, instructional, and assessment practices to
their particular context in order to move their students’ learning
from where it is now to where it should be. To be a FIT Teacher is
to make a heroic commitment to learning—not just to the learning
of every student in the classroom, but to the professional learning
necessary to grow, inspire, and lead.
What is FIT Teaching?
What is a FIT Teacher?
This book introduces the powerful FIT Teaching Tool, which
harnesses the FIT Teaching approach and presents a
detailed continuum of growth and leadership. It’s a close-up
look at what intentional and targeting teaching is and what
successful teachers do to
• Plan with purpose
• Cultivate a learning climate
• Instruct with intention
• Assess with a system
• Impact student learning
Designed to foster discussion among educators about what
they are doing in the classroom, the FIT Teaching Tool can
be used by teachers for self-assessment; by peers for
collegial feedback in professional learning communities; by
instructional coaches to focus on the skills teachers need
both onstage and off; and by school leaders to highlight their
teachers’ strengths and value. Join authors Douglas Fisher,
Nancy Frey, and Stefani Arzonetti Hite for an examination of
what makes great teachers great, and see how educators
at all grade levels and all levels of experience are taking
intentional steps toward enhanced professional practice.
STUDY
GUIDE
ONLINE
Browse excerpts from ASCD books: ww.ascd.org/books
Many ASCD members received this book as
a member benefit upon its initial release.
Learn more at: www.ascd.org/memberbooks
EDUCATION
Alexandria, VA USA
INTENTIONAL AND TARGETED
TEACHING
FISHER | FREY | HITE
Targeted Teaching
A Framework for Teacher
Growth and Leadership
Intentional and
T H E F I T T E A C H I N G A P P R O A C H
Douglas FISHER | Nancy FREY | Stefani Arzonetti HITE
IntentionalTargetedTeaching_Covers_Fpp.indd All Pages 4/1/16 9:22 AM

http://www.ascd.org/memberbooks

http://www.ascd.org/books

Introduction: Becoming a FIT Teacher
1—Planning with Purpose
2—Cultivating a Learning Climate
3—Instructing with Intention
4—Assessing with a System
5—Impacting Student Learning
Conclusion—Taking Up the Challenge
Acknowledgments
Appendix—The FITTeaching Growth and Leadership Tool
References
Index
About the Authors
Search this Book
fisher2016-one-page
Introduction: Becoming a FIT Teacher
1—Planning with Purpose
2—Cultivating a Learning Climate
3—Instructing with Intention
4—Assessing with a System
5—Impacting Student Learning
Conclusion—Taking Up the Challenge
Acknowledgments
Appendix—The FITTeaching Growth and Leadership Tool
References
Index
About the Authors
Search this Book

<< /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (Adobe RGB \0501998\051) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /CMYK /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType true /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams true /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo true /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts false /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 151 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages false /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.25 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.25 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/AntiAliasGrayImages false
/CropGrayImages true
/GrayImageMinResolution 151
/GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleGrayImages false
/GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
/GrayImageResolution 300
/GrayImageDepth -1
/GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2
/GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000
/EncodeGrayImages true
/GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode
/AutoFilterGrayImages true
/GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
/GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.25 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.25 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/AntiAliasMonoImages false
/CropMonoImages true
/MonoImageMinResolution 400
/MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleMonoImages false
/MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
/MonoImageResolution 1200
/MonoImageDepth -1
/MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000
/EncodeMonoImages true
/MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode
/MonoImageDict << /K -1 >>
/AllowPSXObjects false
/CheckCompliance [
/None
]
/PDFX1aCheck false
/PDFX3Check false
/PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
/PDFXNoTrimBoxError true
/PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true
/PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2)
/PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier (CGATS TR 001)
/PDFXOutputCondition ()
/PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org)
/PDFXTrapped /False
/CreateJDFFile false
/Description << /ENU (IPC Print Services, Inc. Please use these settings with InDesign CS2, CS3 or Acrobat 8. These settings should work well for every type of job; B/W, Color or Spot Color. We will be happy to customize settings for your needs - please contact Pre-press Helpdesk at \(888\) 563 3220 or prepress_helpdesk@ipcjci.com 02/04/07) >>
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(Common)
(1.0)
]
/OtherNamespaces [
<< /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >>
<< /AddBleedMarks true /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks true /AddPageInfo true /AddRegMarks false /BleedOffset [ 9 9 9 9 ] /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /ClipComplexRegions true /ConvertStrokesToOutlines true /ConvertTextToOutlines true /GradientResolution 300 /LineArtTextResolution 1200 /PresetName ([High Resolution]) /PresetSelector /HighResolution /RasterVectorBalance 1 >>
/FormElements false
/GenerateStructure false
/IncludeBookmarks false
/IncludeHyperlinks false
/IncludeInteractive false
/IncludeLayers false
/IncludeProfiles true
/MarksOffset 18
/MarksWeight 0.250000
/MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(CreativeSuite)
(2.0)
]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK
/PageMarksFile /RomanDefault
/PreserveEditing true
/UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged
/UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile
/UseDocumentBleed false
>>
<< /AllowImageBreaks true /AllowTableBreaks true /ExpandPage false /HonorBaseURL true /HonorRolloverEffect false /IgnoreHTMLPageBreaks false /IncludeHeaderFooter false /MarginOffset [ 0 0 0 0 ] /MetadataAuthor () /MetadataKeywords () /MetadataSubject () /MetadataTitle () /MetricPageSize [ 0 0 ] /MetricUnit /inch /MobileCompatible 0 /Namespace [ (Adobe) (GoLive) (8.0) ] /OpenZoomToHTMLFontSize false /PageOrientation /Portrait /RemoveBackground false /ShrinkContent true /TreatColorsAs /MainMonitorColors /UseEmbeddedProfiles false /UseHTMLTitleAsMetadata true >>
]
>> setdistillerparams
<< /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [792.000 1224.000] >> setpagedevice

EDT 500

Ling Zhang

Comprehensible Expectations

Considering my skill and knowledge levels, I think I am currently at the developing level regarding comprehensive expectations. My students can explicitly articulate and understand the learning goals so that most students chosen randomly may justify or prove what they learned, why they learned it, and how they learned it(Fisher et al., 2016).In improving my practice to reach the teaching level, I may invite the other teachers to express understandable perceptions of learning, clarify or illustrate what they learn by most randomly chosen pupils, why they learn the information, and how they understood it.

Goal-setting Opportunities

Regarding goal-setting opportunities, I feel I am at the developing level where I allow students to set their goals and promote their summative use by students, limiting their capability to monitor formative progress. In improving my practice, I wish to attain the teaching and leading levels (Fisher et al., 2016). I may achieve the teaching level by providing focused and clear chances for my learners to set and measure their evolution towards achieving mastery and learning objectives. On the other hand, to attain the leading level, I need to support my colleagues to offer focused and clear opportunities for learners to set and monitor progress in achieving their goals related to mastery and learning.

Types of Feedback

On the types of feedback, I am at the developing stage where I provide feedback on self-regulation, tasks, and progress. However, this feedback does not match the learners’ progress in learning (Fisher et al., 2016). I feel that I praise the students so much that I end up diluting the feedback. I wish to attain the teaching level where I will select the kind of feedback most favorable for offering learners progressive feedback concerning self-regulation and the tasks.

Usefulness of Feedback

On the usefulness of feedback, I feel I am at the teaching level where I successfully provide learners with actionable, understandable, specific, and timely feedback (Fisher et al., 2016). However, to improve my practice to attain the highest level, I need to support my workmates in their capacity to offer learners actionable, understandable, specific, and timely feedback.

Needs-based Instruction.

I feel I am not yet apparent in offering needs-based instructions. I need to improve my practice by organizing whole-class, small-group, and individual teaching that matches the learner’s basic needed instructions required for academic progress (Fisher et al., 2016). This should be based on trend data. By doing this, I will attain the teaching level.

References

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hite, S. A. (2016). Intentional and Targeted Teaching: A framework for teacher growth and leadership. ASCD.

Running head: INSTRUCTING WITH INTENTION
1

EDT 500

Ling Zhang

Reflection on Instructing with Intention

My level of knowledge and skill relative to my level of performance is relatively proportional. In my future teaching practice, I would improve on the following two areas to better my performance—one of the areas I need to improve in the areas of noticing the learner’s needs. I need to notice misconceptions, errors, and confusion that may affect their rate of learning. It is important to learn to identify the position of the learners by use of relevant probing questions, which might trigger thinking and responding to learning issues (Fisher & Hite, 2016). I should develop attention to the learners’ non-verbal cues and analyze their work to dig into their needs in time. Two, I will need to foster my language support skills to boost the learning process. I need to develop written and verbal language communication skills that will improve learner-teacher relationships and boost the language’s academic usage to promote learning.

Currently, I am at the developing level of performance. I can discharge teaching practice with a good understanding of the learners’ academic needs and experiences. I can implement the learning criteria with sufficient fidelity. My teaching practice is intentional and is solidly implemented to improve the successful performance of the learners. However, it is essential to make certain adjustments to read leading criteria. I will need to learn to embrace criteria aspects with a high degree and provide learners with sufficient support, guidance, and learning resources to promote individual and group learning processes. I should also develop learning opportunities and respect personal practices while promoting collective growth and development. It will be essential to position myself as appropriate as possible to learn from other people and boost a continuous learning attitude (Fisher & Hite, 2016).

References

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hite, S. A. (2016). Intentional and Targeted Teaching: A framework for teacher growth and leadership. ASCD.

Running head: CULTIVATING CULTURAL RESPONSIVE LEARNING CLIMATE
1

CULTIVATING CULTURAL RESPONSIVE LEARNING CLIMATE
4

Ling Zhang

EDT 500

Level of Knowledge and Skills

As I portent as an educator, I am knowledgeable in classroom management skills, including community, positive regard, and a positive learning environment. I have been promoting a culturally responsive learning environment by making informed classroom decisions, creating a welcoming environment, and building agency and identity in learners. This knowledge is instilled during the course training and competency training workshops I attend regularly.

Areas to Improve

Although I have been performing better in enhancing culturally responsive learning, I can still improve in two areas: one, the area of setting a favorable physical learning environment. I utilize the class layout already existing. I have not been fond of altering the set layout to fit my objectives. Although I have been working for myself, I have learned through this resource that a physical environment affects learning performance. It is not all about being tidy like I like it, but making movements easy, removing distractive items, air circulation, and lighting (Fisher et al., 2016, p 54-70). I need o to improve by adapting to an environment that will maximize the teaching practice and boost the learning experience. Two, I need to improve in keeping records. Keeping instructional records has been a tall order for me. Non-instructional record-keeping is not even my concern. However, I have realized that keeping both instructional and non-instructional records is good in identifying and commenting on the learners’ academic and social progress. For instance, I will use academic performance records and correlate them with outdoor behavior records to judge improvement in learners’ academics and social behavior.

Educator Level

Currently, I am at the developing level. I have slightly good understanding and connectedness with learners implement learning criteria with fidelity. Slight adjustments to move to the maximum level are necessary. I would need to begin to accept continuous learning concepts and respect every individual’s views and values. I will need to consider my work as a resource mobilizer and developer of others to better responsible persons in the future. This implies that I must cultivate morals and social responsiveness in learners and allow them to grow holistically (Fisher et al., 2016, p 54-70).

Reference

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hite, S. A. (2016). Intentional and Targeted Teaching: A framework for teacher growth and leadership. ASCD.

2

Ling Zhang

EDT 500

Planning with Purpose Reflection

I believe this FIT planning teaching tool will expand a lot knowledge to me. The rubics in the first chapter- Planning with Purpose gives me a lot help to understand how a teacher grows.

Relating to the performance levels in the rubric of identifying content learning intentions, I fall under the category of developing level of growth. Consequently, I want to teach mathematics in the primary school and I plan to give them some brief tasks on the book and then teach the way to solve those tasks. However, I do not have many idea to know what they really want to learn and what should I support to help them in specific details. So I consider myself as developing level since I need to learn how to make the learning taget clearly and to make students enduing understand the materies. I can advance to teaching leavel in this rubic if I can plan those tasks related with my teaching plan with a clear intention. For example, if I want to let them know how to calculate easy multiply tasks, then I would like to introduce the multiplication tables.

· 1 times 1 is 1, 1 times 2 is 2,…, 1 times 12 is 12;

· 2 times 1 is 2, 2 times 2 is 4,…, 2 times 12 is 24;

· …

· 12 times 1 is 12, 12 times 2 is 24,…, 12 times 12 is 144;

I feel the key point to advane the next level is to understand what should I really need to teach based on the tect book and how to make a easy way to let the students understand the knowledge.

Therefore, I believe this whole FIT planning teachihng tool can help me to become a final leading level of growth teacher. It offers a lot details on how to improve the teaching.

4

Ling Zhang

EDT 500

Reflection of impacting student learning

Examining and reflecting on achievements of learning targets is crucial for students. Students regularly develop different individual goals and set specific steps needed to achieve the identified learning targets. Teachers are required to demonstrate how student learning has evolved both in the short-term and long-term. Based on my level of knowledge and skills relative to performance levels, there are two areas where I could improve my practice. The first area is consistently demonstrating a significant impact on student learning measured across units of study. Developing this skill may be challenging, and therefore, it requires the use of different strategies. A common challenge may be conflating evidence of student learning with evidence of teaching practices (Fisher et al., 2016). Therefore, it is critical to learn ways of differentiating the two aspects.

The second area is where I could improve my practice is when most students consistently meet challenging but achievable long-term goals transfer goals. Standardized tests are used to measure the progress of students toward annual goals. The value of education should be long-term since students should have the ability to remember what they have learned and use the knowledge where necessary. For instance, students should apply mathematical reasoning to solve challenges. However, there are various debates on using value-added measures, which makes it even harder to determine what portion of student’s knowledge can be attributed solely and directly to classroom learning.

On the rubric, I think I am on the level of students inconsistently meet long-term transfer goals, or the teacher doesn’t set challenging but achievable goals. To move to the next level, I think effective teacher-student and colleague collaboration would be effective. Collaboration is an effective measure since it facilitates discussions that would result in positive results. For example, collaboration would help share ideas on different strategies used by other individuals to ensure understanding information and apply it for the short-term and long-term. Collaborative conversations are critical and effective in improving students’ learning outcomes (Fisher et al., 2016). The second action that I would take to move up on the rubric is setting achievable personal goals. Personal goals would help in setting a specific direction to follow to be successful. Moreover, these personal goals should be aligned to learning standards, and they should be measurable.

The third action that I would need to take to move up at least one level on the rubric is doing regular self-assessments. One way to ensure this is successful is by completing personal tests regarding class readings. This may be weekly to assess the comprehension of weekly readings. However, this timeline could be changed depending on different factors. This self-assess should be regular. These consistent self-assessments would also help me recognize my strengths and weaknesses and address them accordingly. I can utilize the findings attained from the self-assessment to identify any growth opportunities. It is also imperative to avoid the negative perception that moving to the next level is difficult. By avoiding negative perceptions, it would be easier to focus on measures of being successful. The last action is getting a mentor. A mentor can provide important information through coaching on how to move up at least one level on the rubric. Additionally, coaching would help in improving the personal skills required to improve comprehension abilities.

Reference

Fisher, D., Frey, N. & Hite, S. (2016). Intentional and Targeted teaching : a framework for teacher growth and leadership. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.