One of the most fascinating aspects of research on how our students learn is that almost every study begins with the assumption of a motivated learner.  As teachers, we know this is not a safe assumption.  Right? 

We have been lamenting the phrase “learning loss” since we first heard it in June 2020. Has there been learning loss? Are the 6th graders now reading like 3^rd graders? Did students forget all that they knew? Unlikely.

There will be crises to attend to, although we hope not as severe as those of the past year. In addition, there will be opportunities to lead the rebound, as we like to think of it.

 The science of learning offers promising principles or practices that may work in our classrooms. 

Effective tutoring is much more complex than simply “telling” learners what they are missing and giving them empty praise about who they are as a learner. So, what does work best in tutoring?

We know good leaders work to develop collective teacher efficacy because it is a powerful way to increase student learning (effect size of 1.27). So, we wondered: what would happen if we applied what we know to developing collective student efficacy?

Student learning communities give all students access to deeper learning.

We establish clarity in learning through purposeful, intentional, and deliberate organization, explanations, examples and guided practice, and assessments of student learning (Fendick, 1990).

With some ingenuity, universal response systems can still work in remote and hybrid learning.

These labels set into motion a cascade of diminished expectations, negative self-image, and self-fulfilling prophecies.