S5 E2 - My Most and Least Favourite F-Words

Subscribe to the Podcast

Hello, hello, welcome to this episode of the Structured Literacy Podcast recorded right here in Tasmania, the lands of the Palawa people. Today's episode is a little bit of fun with a serious message, and I'm going to tell you about my most and least favourite F-words. But don't worry, there won't be any swearing. This is not that kind of podcast.

Let's begin with a story.

Imagine you're teaching a class of students. You have a program manual in your hand that tells you exactly what to do and what to say. You've had time to get used to the routines and are managing to keep the students engaged. At your school you've been told not to deviate from the script, that 100% fidelity to the program will lead to great outcomes. You used to be a little scared of teaching the content of these lessons, but you're more confident now, after some professional learning. You don't feel like an expert, but you know how to answer most questions that the students ask. In this particular lesson you start with a little joke and the students chuckle, always a win, and you're ready to start the lesson. You've seen some real growth with your students. When you used to teach spelling, you gave students worksheets, rainbow words and sometimes what you thought were engaging tasks like word searches. You know that in this former practice you were attempting to deal with core content, but students need us to lead the lessons, not give them entertaining things to do. So now things are much better, except that there are a couple of students that you aren't so sure about. These students don't catch on to the content as quickly as others. They need explanations repeated and do better in other subjects when you can share more contextualised examples, but in this lesson you've agreed that you'll stick to the script. After all, one in, all in.

This example features my two most and least favourite F-words. Let's start with the least favourite ones and get them out of the way.

The F-words

The first F-word that I don't care for is fun.

So many times we confuse entertainment and engagement. When students are laughing, smiling and having fun, they look like they're into it, but entertainment is fleeting. It's about keeping students occupied and focused in the moment. That doesn't necessarily lead to learning. Engagement, on the other hand, is when students are actively participating in the learning process, making connections and doing the cognitive work necessary to grow. The key difference between fun and engagement lies in who's doing the work. In entertainment-driven classrooms, the teacher often does most of the heavy lifting, performing, facilitating games or orchestrating activities that look fun but don't require much from the students. In an engaged classroom, it's the students who are doing the thinking, collaborating and grappling with the material. They're invested not because it's fun, but because it's meaningful and purposeful.

The theory we draw on to deepen our understanding here is that different types of memory exist. This was described by Tulving in 1972. Episodic Memory refers to memory for specific events or experiences tied to a particular time and place. For example, a student might remember the fun game they played in class or how the teacher dressed up as a historical figure, but not necessarily the content or skills intended to be learned.

Semantic Memory, on the other hand, involves memory for factual knowledge and concepts independent of personal experience. This is where the deeper transferable learning happens. Students remember and understand key ideas, facts and principles that they can apply to different contexts. The litmus test is simple: at the end of the lesson, can students articulate what they learned, why it matters and how it connects to what they'll learn next and what they've learned before? If the answer is yes, then you've struck the right balance.

Rejecting the idea of fun learning doesn't mean we can't be playful in the classroom from time to time. It's just that playfulness serves the learning, it doesn't hinder it.

While I don't care for the word fun as it relates to instruction, my least favourite F-word of all right now is fidelity. Now, before you go and tell your team that it's free choice day in instruction, because Jocelyn said we don't have to work with fidelity, listen to my thoughts about why. I guess it depends on which definition of fidelity you're talking about.

One definition of instructional fidelity is: "High quality implementation (that's often referred to as fidelity) means implementing classroom lessons and activities as intended by the program's developer. This would include teaching all of the lessons in sequence and carefully following the instructions within each lesson plan so that all of the points and objectives are covered using the methods intended by the author of the program. (Keep listening) High quality implementation also has a qualitative component. Teachers are said to implement well when they are prepared, when they make desired points with clarity, teach with enthusiasm and create a climate of respect so that students feel safe and engaged in the process. Because every group of students is unique in terms of experiences, needs and cultural background, implementing well also means knowing when and how a program may need to be adapted in order to achieve its goals. It's possible to retain fidelity to a program design by making sure that any modifications are aligned with the program's message and objectives."

Now, this definition I really like. It's what I have in mind when I think about how I like the programs and resources that I write to be used. I don't know your students. I aim to provide enough guidance that, if lesson steps are delivered as written, a teacher can adjust to meet the needs of the students and get great outcomes. I don't want teachers changing up the order of the lesson elements or leaving things out. However, I do expect teachers to make decisions about how many words or sentences to include in a lesson and whether, after conductive formative assessment, students are ready to move on to the next part of a sequence.

The version of fidelity that has resulted in this word being in my least favourite list is the version described in the scenario at the start of the episode. A program is implemented and teachers are expected to teach it without deviating from what is on the page. On one hand, this relieves teachers of a lot of pressure. They don't have to think too hard other than do what's on the page, and there's a place for that in instruction when you're very first learning. But what this means is that when we are teaching, we're doing it in a way that may or may not be meeting the needs of the students in front of us. The result is that we can see students in front of us who need something else or more time, but we're pressured into moving on in the content. For far too many teachers and schools, fidelity has come to mean this second version. When this is the case, instruction becomes about the developer or the writer and not about responding to the needs of students. Please understand me. I'm not talking about teachers going rogue or cherry-picking bits of instruction that they like. Let's hear that definition again.

"High quality implementation means implementing classroom lessons and activities as intended by the program's developer. This would include teaching all of the lessons in sequence and carefully following the instructions within each lesson plan so that all of the points and objectives are covered using the methods intended by the author of the program."

We don't have to choose between being consistent with a resource creator's intention and serving students. We can have both. What that requires to make it work is a strong understanding of what are the negotiables and not-negotiables of any particular area of instruction. So for Reading Success in Action, our early years phonics program, we have a document that says what the negotiables and not-negotiables are for this to be successful. If you have that for teachers across the curriculum, they'll know exactly what they can and can't do.

That brings us to the end of my least favourite F-words. Let's get into my most favourite. My first favourite F-word is foundational, as in foundational skills. We often worry about comprehension and writing, and these are absolutely important factors in instruction. But having an unapologetic focus on building foundational skills for every child who needs it sets students up for all of the writing and comprehending we want to happen.

To make this endeavour a reality, we need to be super targeted on using every instructional minute to maximise learning. As a principal recently said to me, I want the effort we're putting in to be matched by the results we're seeing, and I thought this was a wonderful expression of what we should be aiming for. When we have clarity about exactly what our students need and prioritise those needs, terrific things happen.

Finally, we come to my most favourite F-word of all, and that is functional.

It is a definite step in the right direction for more focus to be put on explicitly teaching morphology and orthography across the years of primary school. However, what isn't terrific is the pressure that teachers put on themselves, feeling like they have to be experts in order to teach well. Yes, we do need to be committed to growing our knowledge of how our language works, but what we don't need to be to teach well is a linguist. The focus of instruction isn't to teach our students every nitty-gritty bit of information about etymology or the words. The focus of instruction is to give our students a functional level of knowledge to facilitate confident reading and spelling. That's the goal.

So if you've been avoiding morphology lessons because the imposter monsters tell you that you aren't knowledgeable enough, it's time to give yourself a break. Choose a strong, evidence-informed resource or tool to teach with that includes teacher background knowledge, so that you have what you need at hand when you need it. A great resource will help you build knowledge as well as skill. Great teaching is about meeting the needs of our students. We do this when we grow our knowledge and build skills and explicit teaching principles. When this happens, we can use our programs and resources as intended, at the same time as meeting our students' needs.

I hope that you found this episode helpful, and if you were expecting some swear words, I'm very sorry, I was well behaved for us all. Until next time, happy teaching, bye.

Show Notes:

Tulving E. 1972. Episodic and semantic memory. In Organization of Memory, ed. E Tulving, W Donaldson, pp. 381–403. New York: Academic

Looking for resources and training to help build foundational skills and functional levels of knowledge? Join us inside The Resource Room!