An incredible amount of great teaching happens in classrooms around the country every day.
In some places and at some times, though, instruction is not as good as it could be.
This series will look at some common instructional practices that some educators think shouldn’t be so common.
‘Less Homework’
Jeremy D. Visone is an associate professor of educational leadership and instructional technology at Central Connecticut State University, where he prepares leaders of public schools. He is the author of Empowering Teacher Leadership: Strategies and Systems to Realize Your School’s Potential and Teacher Leadership Practice in High-Performing Schools: A Blueprint for Excellence:
I have considered publicly apologizing to the students I taught in my first year of teaching. If I knew then all that I now know about what works, I could have been so much better of a teacher for them! As educators, we always seek to improve what we do. Of course, it is all in the delivery, right?
Much to my surprise, one of my graduate educational leadership students suggested a few years ago that I lecture more, since I was so good at it! Whereas, I might have to agree that I can be entertaining, the reality is that many instructional strategies can be effective, if appropriately and meaningfully delivered to your students. For example, an engaging, five-minute monologue packed with dissonance and thought-provoking questions can grab students’ attention and prime them for learning activities that will follow.
Naturally, the reverse can also be true. Socratic seminars, without proper instruction for students on their roles and responsibilities, or rigorous, multiphase projects, without scaffolding, can be exercises in futility.
Ultimately, effective teachers use varied instructional strategies, making decisions and adjustments based on students’ needs. Let’s consider some general instructional shifts to be better for our students.
Shift from . . .
Voluminous homework and group projects completed outside of school. John Hattie’s Visible Learning rankings indicate that homework, in general, is not a terribly effective strategy. Additionally, students (and their parents!) can become frustrated when homework demands are overly time-consuming, vague, and/or complicated. This frustration can lead to an overall dislike for school and the subject matter.
Shift toward . . .
Less homework and additional in-class practice and project work. Students will benefit when they are provided such opportunities in class, where they can receive real-time feedback from you and/or their peers. Further, they can work with peers without having to arrange times to meet around their sports, artistic pursuits, family obligations, and other commitments.
Shift from . . .
Zero-sum competition/grading on the curve. Though friendly competition can be fun and engaging for students of all ages, when the consequence of this competition is a zero-sum result, the “friendly” nature of the competition is lost. Do not pit individuals or groups of students against each other for the one A you will award within the class. Do not give the “winning” group a homework pass for the night (see above), while the rest of the students need to complete an (punishment) assignment that evening.
Shift toward . . .
True cooperation. Use the entire class as a cohesive learning community and allow all individuals and groups to succeed, independent of the successes of others. Students and groups can even leverage each other’s learning by providing time to share while work is ongoing. Someone might have solved or created something that will assist others. I always told students that my goal was to help them all succeed. Educators should not have a maximum number of students who can succeed.
Shift from . . .
“Ping-pong” questioning. This is the classic whole-group discussion, where a teacher asks the class a question, one student volunteers a response, and the teacher provides feedback to that one student. Repeat. This limits the thinking of other students, as only one student is interacting with the teacher at a time.
Shift toward . . .
Including many students for each question asked. Such approaches include all students voting, writing responses before some share with the class, discussing with a group before responding, among others. Teachers can also select many students to respond in rapid succession without providing feedback, so long as all students have had time to generate a response. Students can also produce products of their thinking (i.e., chart paper, white board, etc.) to display their answers. The spirit here is to maximize the learning from each question asked by including all students in the thinking.
I could continue for pages about worthy instructional shifts, but in this bounded space, these are a few initial ideas to get you thinking. For many other ideas in this space, check out Why are We Still Doing That? by Pérsida and William Himmele. Let’s use what works to be better for our students!
‘Meet the Learner Where They’re at’
Ann Stiltner is a high school special education and reading teacher in Connecticut with more than 20 years of experience. She shares her passion and love for working in the classroom at her blog from Room A212 (www.annstiltner.com/blog):
As a special education teacher, I have a broad knowledge of instruction across many content areas. I also hear from the students I support about their challenges in the classroom. From these observations, I have identified eight examples of ineffective instructional strategies along with more successful alternatives.
-
Organizing and delivering instruction in the same way students were taught decades ago limits students’ growth. These older forms of instruction continue to be copied today despite the amount of pedagogical research supporting new approaches. It can be hard to change routines and try something new. A more effective way to teach is to observe how each student learns best and experiment with different strategies.
Think how a student would learn something new from their unique perspective. To be effective, meet the learner where they’re at; be creative and think outside-the-box instead of using what feels comfortable or familiar. Trying a new instructional strategy or making use of websites like Kahoot might not work right away; it may need to be tweaked and tried several times. Newer strategies do not mean lowering standards. Rather, they aim to bring all students up to their own standards.
- Being tough, rigid, and cold with students does not build a positive relationship. A teacher who creates rapport and builds trust with students improves their engagement, motivation, and willingness to take risks. When a teacher does not admit making a mistake, they miss the chance to model for students a growth mindset and allow students to know them better.
- Standing in the front of the classroom and not walking around does not engage students. Being out among students when delivering instruction or during an activity makes it easier for students to ask questions and teachers to observe students’ learning to help individualize instruction.
- Straight rows of desks do not promote interaction among students. Mixing up the layout of a classroom allows students to cooperate on projects and engage in student discourse. When students can move about the classroom, it benefits students who need movement and lets students get to know their peers.
-
Lessons that solely involve students independently reading a textbook or novel selection and answering end-of-the-chapter comprehension questions is not an effective strategy for developing critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. Directed and scaffolded instruction and activities are more effective ways to deliver content.
Textbook reading and comprehension questions are appropriate after students have been supported in learning new content. Textbook reading is more effective if it is scaffolded to address the needs of diverse learners. Comprehension questions can be used later to assess students’ mastery and comprehension of content material. Students’ learning outcomes are improved when lessons include cooperative group assignments and active ways to engage with the material rather than individually answering comprehension questions.
- Using the same language or approach to explain material to students who are confused often does not improve their understanding. Instead, use different language and paraphrase the initial explanation. Try to explain the topic from a different direction or with an analogy. This reframing requires getting in the head of the student to understand their perspective on the topic. Address the topic from the student’s way of thinking so that they understand the concept instead of falling back on only one way of understanding it.
- Expecting students to know what they are confused about when they ask a question is unrealistic. Students often require help determining which step or part of a concept confuses them. They perhaps need help visualizing the problem, remembering a fact, clarifying a vocabulary world, or recalling a math rule in order to understand the topic. Asking a series of questions can guide the student to their specific area of confusion and pinpoint what they need help on. This becomes a skill teachers acquire through practice.
- Not grading and returning work in a reasonable amount of time denies students the feedback they need to improve their learning. A more effective instructional strategy is to make the best attempt to regularly give written or verbal feedback to students about the quality of their work to help them grow and improve. Giving timely feedback and returning graded work lets students know if they are progressing with their growth and learning.
ELs Need More Than Visuals and Sentence Stems
Esmeralda Cartagena Collazo, a doctoral candidate and adjunct professor at Texas Woman’s University, brings 17 years of experience in ESL and bilingual education across Puerto Rico, Chicago, and Texas. Her research focus is on preserving Indigenous languages among Latin American immigrant students and promoting inclusive, equitable education for culturally and linguistically diverse communities:
One of the most common ineffective instructional strategies I continue to witness, especially in classrooms with English learners, is the belief that using visuals and sentence stems is enough.
These tools are often used as if they alone can bridge the gap between what students know and what they are expected to express academically. And while visuals and sentence stems are important strategies, they’re often treated like a checkbox: “I posted the sentence stems. I added pictures. I’m differentiating.” But the truth is, those strategies, when used in isolation or without context, do very little to move students toward true language proficiency or academic success.
I’ve walked into classrooms where sentence stems are posted but don’t align with the current lesson. Vocabulary cards and anchor charts are also posted, yet students don’t engage with them, and they become wallpaper. There’s no modeling, no guided use, no connection to prior knowledge, and no room for students to engage in meaningful discourse. One teacher once said to me, “I gave them the dictionary and the sentence stems. I don’t know why they’re still struggling.” I gently asked, “Did you model how to use those supports in context? Did they get a chance to practice them out loud or with a partner? Do they know why they’re using them?” That’s when a light bulb went off.
Another strategy that’s become more common, and problematic, is the overreliance on translations. I’ve seen teachers use tools like Google Translate or rely on translated worksheets, assuming that these alone will make the content accessible. But language isn’t just about words; it’s about context, culture, and interaction. Translation without intentional support often results in miscommunication, confusion, or sterile language that lacks connection to students’ lived experiences.
The root of the problem isn’t just what’s happening in classrooms, it also comes from higher up. Unfortunately, many district-level instructional specialists, coaches, or consultants lack the proper training or experience to support teachers of English-learner students effectively. I’ve witnessed specialists advising teachers to “Make sure you have visuals and sentence stems and you are good to go,” or “Just let him translate everything Google Translate.”
That kind of advice reinforces shallow instructional practices that don’t account for students’ diverse language histories, literacy levels, or cultural backgrounds. When support comes from individuals who don’t fully understand second-language acquisition or culturally and linguistically sustaining pedagogy, it can do more harm than good. Teachers end up implementing strategies without truly understanding the why behind them, and students are the ones who suffer. The saddest part is that this can lead teachers, especially newer ones, to believe that they’re doing the right thing, even when their students are disengaged or not growing.
So what should we be doing?
We need to shift toward asset-based pedagogy that recognizes and celebrates the rich linguistic and cultural resources our students bring into the classroom. It is so important that teachers view students not through a lens of “what they lack” but through a lens of “what they already know.”
Visuals, anchor charts, sentence stems, etc., should be used within meaningful instruction, not just posted. Teachers should model how to use language in context, guide students through structured practice, and encourage them to express their thinking in both their home language and English. Learning should be interactive, collaborative, and reflective of students’ lived experiences. Most importantly, we should be tapping into students’ home languages through translanguaging practices, encouraging them to make connections and express ideas in the language they feel most comfortable in.
Teachers also need to recognize that some students may not read or write in their home language, they may be preliterate, semiliterate, or speak a language without an alphabet, like a logographic or oral Indigenous language. These students still bring rich knowledge and value. Rather than viewing them through a deficit lens, we should support them with oral-language scaffolds, multimodal expression, shared reading, guided drawing, and connections to home. Literacy development can be layered onto their existing strengths, even if they’ve never held a pencil or decoded a word. Their thinking is there; our job is to give it form, not force it into a box.
Thanks to Jeremy, Ann, and Esmeralda for contributing their thoughts.
Responses today answered this question:
What are the most common ineffective instructional strategies used in classrooms today? And what should be used instead of them?
Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at lferlazzo@epe.org. When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.
You can also contact me on X at @Larryferlazzo or on Bluesky at @larryferlazzo.bsky.social
Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email. And if you missed any of the highlights from the first 13 years of this blog, you can see a categorized list here.
