Why aren’t students using the strategy I taught them?
We all know to teach strategies using explicit instruction or gradual release of responsibility (“I do, we do, you do together, you do alone”), which provides scaffolds and builds learner fluency while incrementally increasing student responsibility for the learning (Dawson & Guare, 2012, 2018; Fisher & Frey, 2011, 2021; Fisher, Frey, & Lapp, 2012; Fisher, Frey, & Hite, 2016). But gradual release of responsibility for strategy instruction means not three or four but dozens of opportunities for practice. We need to build those opportunities for practice into the instructional calendar. Time is precious, however, so let’s explore why this is necessary.
It is often said that, “it takes 21 times to make a habit.” We think about this at New Year’s when we start a new exercise or diet plan or try to refrain from unhealthy practices. But why is it that 21 times make a habit?
The answer is in your brain’s development. After many repetitions, your brain’s neurons begin to physically rewire themselves so that the new habit becomes automatic. (This works for bad habits, too, by the way. You can learn a bad habit just by doing it a lot.) If you’ve ever started driving a new car after spending a lot of time in another one, you know that eventually you adjust to the new gears and dials and it feels automatic; that’s because your neurons eventually rewired themselves (CAST, 2011; Meyer et al., 2014; Rappolt-Schlichtmann et al., 2012).
This cognitive science is included in one of our high-leverage practices (HLPs) for students with disabilities. HLP 14: Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies highlights the need to provide enough learning opportunities for students’ neurons to rewire themselves (Budin, Patti, & Rafferty, 2022). When we plan to teach a learning strategy, we need to sit down with a calendar (not a lesson plan) and map out enough opportunities to practice the strategy that all students will develop automaticity. Although many of us have lesson plans with “model, guided practice, independent practice” all in one day, that does not apply in this case. Nobody masters a strategy in one day; we introduce it and then provide many, many opportunities to practice with feedback.
Every brain is different, and every student will get there in a different length of time. What is important is that we understand that this is a key part of the instructional process and we intentionally plan enough repetitions: 21 times may make a habit for some learners, but many of our students will need 35 or 50 opportunities for practice with targeted, constructive feedback.
Take a look at the strategies you have introduced this year. Are students struggling to apply any of them? Just add a dozen or more opportunities for practice to your future plans and you’ll be on the path to helping students rewire their neurons.
References
Budin, S., Patti, A., & Rafferty, L. (2022). Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies to support learning and independence. In J. McLeskey, L. Maheady, B. Billingsley, M. Brownell, & T. Lewis (Eds.), High-leverage practices in the inclusive classroom (2nd ed., pp. 201-217). Routledge.
CAST (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.0. Author.
Dawson, P., & Guare, P. (2012). Coaching students with executive skills deficits. Guilford Press.
Dawson, P., & Guare, P. (2018). Executive skills in children and adolescents: A practical guide to assessment and intervention. Guilford Press.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2011). Engaging the adolescent learner: The first 20 days establishing productive group work in the classroom. International Reading Association.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2012). Teaching students to read like detectives: Comprehending, analyzing, and discussing text. Solution Tree Press.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hite, S. (2016). Intentional and targeted teaching: A framework for teacher growth and leadership. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2021). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility, 3rd ed. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Gordon. D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST.
Rappolt-Schlichtmann, G., Daley, S., & Rose. L. (Eds). (2012). A research reader in universal design for learning. Harvard Education Press.
For more information, contact Susanne Croasdaile, ([email protected]), Program Specialist T/TAC at VCU.