Rosenshine's Principles in Action

Product Information

To avoid cognitive overload, Rosenshine argues that teachers should present information in small steps and only proceed to the next step once the previous steps have been mastered.

The simple language comparing ‘teachers who were more effective or more successful’ with ‘teachers who were less successful’ is persuasive. It’s not as crude as saying ‘good vs bad’– the language lays a path to improvement from less successful to more successful. Who wouldn’t want to be in the group of ‘more effective teachers’?! The tone of the article feels helpful rather than judgemental – which is pretty hard to achieve. Because the article has this evidence-informed layer, I feel compelled to say something about this oversimplification and not everyone likes that,” he told me. “It’s often pointed out that I’m not a teacher anymore. But that’s the point. If you want that credibility, you have to let people like me comment on it. You can’t have your cake and eat it.”

A Day with Tom Sherrington - A Zest for Learning

What we should be teaching new teachers isn’t only (or, even) Vygotsky, Piaget and Bloom, but something that makes more sense, is more relevant and something that is based on actual research. This criticism began almost as soon as the American Educator article was published. For example, education researcher Ian Beatty wrote in a blog in 2012 that the 10 principles “seem to make a frontal assault on a broad swath of ‘reformed’ teaching approaches”. There are four very clear strands that run through the 10 sections – reviewing material, questioning, explaining and modelling, practice. Each of one these can be a focus areas for improvement so there are multiple ways to engage with the ideas and to find a focus for deliberate practice. I asked him what he would like to see become more prevalent in the discussion around Rosenshine’s choices.

Second, explore the implications of each principle at a subject-specific level. The principles and the strands into which Sherrington divides them need to be contextualised for successful implementation and applicability. They ‘have meaning’, Sherrington writes, ‘only in the context of curriculum content’.

Our Review Summary

Rosenshine himself seems to avoid any notion of finality in relation to his list. He writes in the American Educator article that the contents represented only “some” of the instructional principles taken from the research fields of cognitive science, cognitive supports and classroom practice. Rosenshine didn’t intend this paper to be the final word on instructional functions, more as an opening gateway to further research. As Rosenshine himself said: The idea that this is gospel, and if you follow these golden rules you’ll be a master, is doing teachers’ skills a total disservice. It’s much harder than 10 or 17 principles,” she said. “Teachers sit in this glorious messiness that’s got all the spheres of influence that relate to the life of a child.” But I have made up for it by publishing another 25 on the same areas, to try to get that message across that this should be about how you think about what you do, the evidence you use, the critique you use. “That list gives you probability statements, but what really matters is how you implement it.” Model the techniques: get volunteers to show how the principles are enacted in lessons, bringing them alive, inviting questions and challenges, exploring potential obstacles.