Words and terms matter. Reteaching is synonymous with instructional intervention. However, the word intervention today is mired in the policies and politics of RtI. If we use the term intervention to mean reteaching, too many colleagues will immediately focus on their current emotions and district initiatives related to RtI. So, let’s talk about reteaching.
Before reading further, reflect upon the number of times in the past week that 100% of the children you teach learned 100% of the information, concepts, skills or processes that you taught to them. The old and laughable adage that “if I taught it, they should have learned it” no longer cuts it. “If, when I teach I then efficiently assess their learning so that I can reteach children who have not successfully learned, then all really have learned.” That’s better.
Read on.
Reteaching is essential in the new educational environment of complex high stakes assessments with more emphasis on the word “complex” than the words “high stakes.” Children cannot afford to enter those assessments without a solid understanding of the standards being assessed. Why reteaching? Research on the term “reteaching” is thin. Lalley et al (2006) indicate that pre-teaching and re-teaching produced significant increases in student abilities the math concepts, math problems and math computation. Research on “intervention” is much more extensive. Almost every state has developed resources that assist their educators comply with new regulations related to RtI. See the research base for interventions attached to your state’s department of education.
Reteaching 101.
Marzano (2010) provides the most concise description of good practice.
While teaching new content, skills or processes, check children for their understanding and immediately clarify and/or correct misunderstandings, misconceptions and mistakes. In the flow of new instruction, asking children to summarize, apply, explain to another will indicate the accuracy of their learning. Whatever is not acceptable should and can be addressed at that moment and later verified through another check for understanding. Sounds like Madeline Hunter? She originated the terms “checking for understanding” and “reteaching” in her discussion of mastery teaching the 1980s.
Secondly, reteaching should be purposefully attached to every formative or intermediate assessment that is designed to assess for learning. Problems of misunderstanding, misconception and mistake need to be addressed that time. Typically, this means reteaching to an individual child or a small group tutorial. Plan the time and energy for post-assessment reteaching, because it will be necessary if every child is to be prepared for next learning and/or for a summative assessment in the future. Also plan an extension activity that other children can use to profit their ongoing learning while you reteach.
Lastly, reteaching cannot be a repeat. The words and approach need to respond to the child’s misunderstanding, misconception and mistake. Reteaching must explain the error in the child’s learning and then use good teaching/tutorial practice to extinguish the error(s) and create a new and accurate learning. It is a mini-lesson with all of the good practices of initial instruction including the extinction of error.
The need to reteach is not an evaluation of a teacher’s instructional effectiveness. No one achieves 100% student learning all of the time. Reteaching is a skill and process used by an effective teacher to cause all students to learn.
Effects of Pre-teaching and Re-teaching on Math Achievement and Academic Self-Concept of Students with Low Achievement in Math, Lalley, James P. et al (2006)
“Reviving Reteaching”, Robert J. Marzano, Educational Leadership (Oct 2010, Vol 68, No. 2)