What do you think?
Rate this book
Focus: Elevating the Essentials to Radically Improve Student Learning
Best-selling author Mike Schmoker boils down solutions for improved schools to the most powerful, simple actions and structures that ensure you prepare all students for college, careers, and citizenship.
237 pages, Paperback
First published January 13, 2011
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 164 reviews
December 24, 2018
The book was given to my girlfriend as an end of the year gift (and required reading)by her high performing charter school.
The thesis is that there are three things that truly matter in raising student achievement; what we teach, how we teach it and authentic literacy. Until those three elements in place and implemented properly, we should not think about implementing any other educational fads or nostrum.
I agree with the thesis and appreciate the shout out that Schmoker gives to consortium schools like SOF. However, the author really annoyed me in the first few pages by repeating some off the same falsehoods popularized by Waiting for Superman. Teachers alone will never close an achievement gap that exists because of factors outside the scope of school's services. Perhaps they will narrow the gap, but teachers alone can not close it.
Schmoker argues for authentic literacy and against test prep, but then goes on to praise schools for their high standardized test scores which seems like a contradiction. He also has a habit of holding up model schools for their impressive results while not looking beneath the surface. For instance he praises a charter chain with the second highest student attrition in NYC(>30% between grades 6-8) as an educational model. There are several other examples of miracle schools that don't hold up throughout the book.
Schmoker would have done well to follow his own advice and focused on the three essential ingredients of education. When he deviates from his thesis, the research doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
The thesis is that there are three things that truly matter in raising student achievement; what we teach, how we teach it and authentic literacy. Until those three elements in place and implemented properly, we should not think about implementing any other educational fads or nostrum.
I agree with the thesis and appreciate the shout out that Schmoker gives to consortium schools like SOF. However, the author really annoyed me in the first few pages by repeating some off the same falsehoods popularized by Waiting for Superman. Teachers alone will never close an achievement gap that exists because of factors outside the scope of school's services. Perhaps they will narrow the gap, but teachers alone can not close it.
Schmoker argues for authentic literacy and against test prep, but then goes on to praise schools for their high standardized test scores which seems like a contradiction. He also has a habit of holding up model schools for their impressive results while not looking beneath the surface. For instance he praises a charter chain with the second highest student attrition in NYC(>30% between grades 6-8) as an educational model. There are several other examples of miracle schools that don't hold up throughout the book.
Schmoker would have done well to follow his own advice and focused on the three essential ingredients of education. When he deviates from his thesis, the research doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 10, 2014
This is boring and repetitive. The title is the main point. the sub-points should be bulleted on a page and a few pages of samples can be provided. This is article length material stretched into a book.
April 10, 2011
First things first. The ASCD charges obscene prices for its books. This thin paperback is almost $28, for instance. I bought the Kindle version for $15 and STILL felt slightly taken. Slightly.
Second, get ready for repetition, get ready for repetition. Don't let it annoy you because Schmoker does it a lot (and even admits as much himself). He has a rather simple solution to education's woes and he's going to bang the drum for it six ways to Sunday. At least it's well-documented. And, as I read it all, very agreeable to me. This, then, is a kind 3-star (read: 3.5 star) review -- one that would be higher if not for all the padding that comes with redundancy.
Schmoker, like me, is a depth over breadth guy. He advocates slashing the standards in ALL subjects by at least 50%. He distrusts our collective love affair with technology in education. He invokes the mantra of reading, writing, and talking issues based on facts again and again (and again). As there is a chapter each for English, social studies, science, and math, he shows you how it is done in the four main academic arenas. Lecturing? OK, if you know what you're doing, start with a hook, and take breaks every 7 minutes for kids to process. Inquiry? It's a golden word. Textbooks? Schmoker's ambivalent on these expensive doorstops, but whatever.
Those of us who feel as though there is way too much material to cover and that students could learn more with less will enjoy Schmoker's cry to simplify. And if all that writing he advocates sounds like a lot of work for teachers, there's always his website (touted 23 times), which has a link on how to reduce paperwork.
Wha--? Did you say "reduce paperwork"? Take me to your leader...!
Second, get ready for repetition, get ready for repetition. Don't let it annoy you because Schmoker does it a lot (and even admits as much himself). He has a rather simple solution to education's woes and he's going to bang the drum for it six ways to Sunday. At least it's well-documented. And, as I read it all, very agreeable to me. This, then, is a kind 3-star (read: 3.5 star) review -- one that would be higher if not for all the padding that comes with redundancy.
Schmoker, like me, is a depth over breadth guy. He advocates slashing the standards in ALL subjects by at least 50%. He distrusts our collective love affair with technology in education. He invokes the mantra of reading, writing, and talking issues based on facts again and again (and again). As there is a chapter each for English, social studies, science, and math, he shows you how it is done in the four main academic arenas. Lecturing? OK, if you know what you're doing, start with a hook, and take breaks every 7 minutes for kids to process. Inquiry? It's a golden word. Textbooks? Schmoker's ambivalent on these expensive doorstops, but whatever.
Those of us who feel as though there is way too much material to cover and that students could learn more with less will enjoy Schmoker's cry to simplify. And if all that writing he advocates sounds like a lot of work for teachers, there's always his website (touted 23 times), which has a link on how to reduce paperwork.
Wha--? Did you say "reduce paperwork"? Take me to your leader...!
January 3, 2019
Here's the deal... If you are not a teacher but make decisions about education, you need to read this book. Every good educator knows what to do to teach students; however, there are people making decisions about how we should teach and about how we are to document every step, and test at every corner. You want students to learn? Then let the teachers determine what students do not know, compared it to what the should know, so that we can provide an environment for them to learn.
February 23, 2013
I gave this a three simply because the title reminds us to focus on the essentials, and Schmoker reminds us of the simplicity and importance of authentic literacy in all classrooms. Reading and writing in all classrooms is essential to learning and to maintaining literacy levels. Additionally, the new Common Core standards (which are more simplistic, at least compared to our old state standards) focus on creating and supporting arguments, which Schmoker emphasized throughout. As far as a magic bullet to fix our curriculum and thus our educational system, the author might have had too narrow a focus.
I agree completely that literacy is the most important way to learn, I don't think that it is a magic bullet for student engagement. The author never addresses the issue of student engagement, or cross-curricular organization. As an avid reader, I would still be bored if I were in 6 hours of classes per day, and the majority of the time was spent reading. That's a manageable problem for creative teachers, though. What's not manageable, and what the author fails to recognize, are the roles of elementary, pre-school, and family and community factors. He argues that authentic literacy is the key to education, but does not recognize that many teachers already know this, but struggle with under/illiterate students at the secondary level. Getting books into the hands of pre school aged children, and getting students to similar reading levels by the time they leave elementary school is the challenge. It is also what is needed to make a literacy-centered model work in a differentiated high school classroom setting.
Additionally, there is much people have said about Schmoker's addressing of projects and labs. When I read, I did not believe that the author was saying that all projects and labs were poor use of instructional time. Rather, I think he was trying to say that many projects and labs are not tied to learning objectives, and do not always make the important connections. I think that the author did not clearly make this point, though. Any teacher who has applied backward design (or UbD) to their curriculum probably found projects or activities that were fun, and enjoyable by the teacher and students, but did not meet any important learning objective. That being said, there are plenty of authentic projects and labs that are connected to the curriculum and provide the students with a chance to increase their depth of knowledge on a particular subject.
Overall, the author wants teachers to ignore flashy new ways of doing things and technology and trends, and keep reading, writing, and speaking at the core of their curriculum. Overall, I agree with this approach to teaching. However, being "new" doesn't make something inherently bad. The author's focus is so simplified, it forgets to address the problem in many classrooms-- student engagement.
I agree completely that literacy is the most important way to learn, I don't think that it is a magic bullet for student engagement. The author never addresses the issue of student engagement, or cross-curricular organization. As an avid reader, I would still be bored if I were in 6 hours of classes per day, and the majority of the time was spent reading. That's a manageable problem for creative teachers, though. What's not manageable, and what the author fails to recognize, are the roles of elementary, pre-school, and family and community factors. He argues that authentic literacy is the key to education, but does not recognize that many teachers already know this, but struggle with under/illiterate students at the secondary level. Getting books into the hands of pre school aged children, and getting students to similar reading levels by the time they leave elementary school is the challenge. It is also what is needed to make a literacy-centered model work in a differentiated high school classroom setting.
Additionally, there is much people have said about Schmoker's addressing of projects and labs. When I read, I did not believe that the author was saying that all projects and labs were poor use of instructional time. Rather, I think he was trying to say that many projects and labs are not tied to learning objectives, and do not always make the important connections. I think that the author did not clearly make this point, though. Any teacher who has applied backward design (or UbD) to their curriculum probably found projects or activities that were fun, and enjoyable by the teacher and students, but did not meet any important learning objective. That being said, there are plenty of authentic projects and labs that are connected to the curriculum and provide the students with a chance to increase their depth of knowledge on a particular subject.
Overall, the author wants teachers to ignore flashy new ways of doing things and technology and trends, and keep reading, writing, and speaking at the core of their curriculum. Overall, I agree with this approach to teaching. However, being "new" doesn't make something inherently bad. The author's focus is so simplified, it forgets to address the problem in many classrooms-- student engagement.
July 24, 2012
I cannot believe I got this from my school! In a world of teaching to the test, massive standards, worksheets, and wasteful activities, this book slams all of that. The underlining message of this book is to get students to read and write as often as possible. For example, teachers stress too much on teaching students if they should add "ed" or "ing" to a word than spending actual time reading, writing , and discussing real books.
I will use this book to support some of the changes I will be pushing for in my classroom.
If I ever start my own charter school, this book's ideas would weigh heavily on my mind.
If you are thinking about homeschooling, I would highly recommend this book.
I will use this book to support some of the changes I will be pushing for in my classroom.
If I ever start my own charter school, this book's ideas would weigh heavily on my mind.
If you are thinking about homeschooling, I would highly recommend this book.
June 25, 2020
These strategies seem obvious to me, though it's nice to be reinforced by an expert. Read -- a lot, with variety -- talk about what you read, write about what you read, and read some more. Seems simple enough. Getting all the bits to come together, given time limitations, and both teacher and student attitudes is a whole other ball game. I'll be coming back to particular parts of this one.
***
After some (years of) intentional practice with some of these techniques, the revisit was illuminating and revealed some questions I hadn't thought of. Interestingly, I had a lot more scribbles on this read-through than the last.
***
After some (years of) intentional practice with some of these techniques, the revisit was illuminating and revealed some questions I hadn't thought of. Interestingly, I had a lot more scribbles on this read-through than the last.
July 9, 2018
Easy read. A lot of good ideas and suggestions. In a nut shell...keep it simple.
November 23, 2014
I was pretty disappointed with this book. Although I agree with Schmoker when he argues that there are too many standards and that reading is essential to academic success, these thoughts are nothing new. I also found the book to be riddled with contradictions. Schmoker repeatedly mentions the importance of teachers from the same content area and grade level having the exact same curriculum, but then he writes that there should be two weeks in each semester left for teachers to focus on something they want to teach. How would that be using the same exact curriculum?
Schmoker also repeatedly knocks down differentiation and small groups. Although I believe that whole group instruction is important, I think that there does need to be a balance. Differentiation, whole group instruction, and small group instruction should be used in a curriculum when it best meets the need of getting a lesson through to students. I find it a bit ridiculous, in fact, that Schmoker uses Rafe Esquith's success to support his theory about the importance of just using reading, writing, and talking in the classroom. Don't get me wrong, I love Esquith and found There are No Shortcuts to be inspirational, but I think that this wasn't strong support since Scmoker failed to mention that Esquith's students spend about an extra 3 hours a day in school to focus on reading, plus, they read and perform Shakespeare's plays (Doesn't that sound like Schmoker's idea of a "waste of time"?).
Once again, I agree that we need to stay focused in our instruction and that literacy is important for success, but I think there would be negative consequences if every teacher applied the strategies and ideas exactly as outlined in this book. For example, writercide would be abundant because students would only have experience in writing arguments. As a consequence, there will be no strong writers in fiction, songwriters, playwrights, poets, etc. Also, scientists will be unable to find cures for diseases or solve major problems that plague the world because they will not know how to use the scientific method and conduct experiments. Instead, they will only know how to research by reading about past experiments and observations.
If you want to learn about power standards, I suggest you read about it in Power Standards: Identifying the Standards that Matter the Most by Larry Ainsworth. This book is referenced multiple times in Focus, but I think it would be best to learn about them without a filter.
If you want to learn more about adding literacy to the content areas, read:
Do I Really Have to Teach Reading? by Chris Tovani
and
Teaching Reading in Social Studies, Science, and Math by Laura Robb
Schmoker also repeatedly knocks down differentiation and small groups. Although I believe that whole group instruction is important, I think that there does need to be a balance. Differentiation, whole group instruction, and small group instruction should be used in a curriculum when it best meets the need of getting a lesson through to students. I find it a bit ridiculous, in fact, that Schmoker uses Rafe Esquith's success to support his theory about the importance of just using reading, writing, and talking in the classroom. Don't get me wrong, I love Esquith and found There are No Shortcuts to be inspirational, but I think that this wasn't strong support since Scmoker failed to mention that Esquith's students spend about an extra 3 hours a day in school to focus on reading, plus, they read and perform Shakespeare's plays (Doesn't that sound like Schmoker's idea of a "waste of time"?).
Once again, I agree that we need to stay focused in our instruction and that literacy is important for success, but I think there would be negative consequences if every teacher applied the strategies and ideas exactly as outlined in this book. For example, writercide would be abundant because students would only have experience in writing arguments. As a consequence, there will be no strong writers in fiction, songwriters, playwrights, poets, etc. Also, scientists will be unable to find cures for diseases or solve major problems that plague the world because they will not know how to use the scientific method and conduct experiments. Instead, they will only know how to research by reading about past experiments and observations.
If you want to learn about power standards, I suggest you read about it in Power Standards: Identifying the Standards that Matter the Most by Larry Ainsworth. This book is referenced multiple times in Focus, but I think it would be best to learn about them without a filter.
If you want to learn more about adding literacy to the content areas, read:
Do I Really Have to Teach Reading? by Chris Tovani
and
Teaching Reading in Social Studies, Science, and Math by Laura Robb
March 3, 2013
Noting that the students from Finland, Japan, and China who lead the world academically are part of educational systems where instructors teach more intensely to fewer standards, Schmoker advocates that teams of teachers within American schools examine standards for their particular subject areas and carefully reduce them by half to a set of workable "power standards". He opines that the U.S. educational system is shortchanging students in terms of literacy because too many boards and administrators have been lured by technology, which certainly engages but ultimately delivers little in the way of real, deep learning. Schmoker makes a case for the centrality of literacy--reading, writing, and discussing--in the key subject areas--language arts, social studies, science, and mathematics-- and laments the fact that text books are so rarely used, leaving students unprepared for the reading and intellectual demands of post-secondary education. I find it hard to disagree with Schmoker's observations; I have certainly observed the disparagement of text book use and the praise that is heaped upon teachers who use smart boards or whose students spend time on such projects as movie trailers, web sites and power points--which, engage but develop little deep knowledge of a discipline and too often shortchange students on opportunities to become thoughtful and literate. Having said that, I'm not sure the antidote he prescribes is completely realistic, given some of the extremely troubled, behaviorally challenging students that make up an increasing proportion of our classrooms. Schmoker's bibliography is well worth the read in itself, and I certainly took to heart his advice to teachers on allowing students to process information individually or with a partner after every 5-7 minutes of teacher talk/lecture. Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars. Recommended.
March 2, 2013
I agree with Schmoker that students need to authentically read and write more in school. We all know that basal readers are not the answer. We need to get students into real books and have real discussions about those books. I very much like his approach to the languages arts and history periods. However, I have a few disagreements on the science and math chapters.
He stated that he helped a 6th grade team of science teachers cut the science standards in half and then further cut the physical science standards. I wanted to scream at this! The reason there are so many more physical science standards is because it is literally the base of every other science. If a student has a great understanding of physical science and a teacher who can help make connections to other sciences, then they'll have a great understanding of the concepts of science. Isn't that what we want?
For math, I do agree that there are students who will never need anything beyond algebra, and I'll be the one who says it, it's because we know they won't "get it" beyond that. So they should spend their time truly learning those concepts. However, I do believe that students who understand algebra and geometry should continue on because learning higher levels prepares students to choose a wider variety of careers. As much as Schmoker may want colleges to concede that most careers don't need higher level math, it's not going to happen. So adopting an attitude in high school that out students won't need anything beyond geometry is risky. And I'm married to an engineer- they use math at much higher levels than algebra on a regular basis.
He stated that he helped a 6th grade team of science teachers cut the science standards in half and then further cut the physical science standards. I wanted to scream at this! The reason there are so many more physical science standards is because it is literally the base of every other science. If a student has a great understanding of physical science and a teacher who can help make connections to other sciences, then they'll have a great understanding of the concepts of science. Isn't that what we want?
For math, I do agree that there are students who will never need anything beyond algebra, and I'll be the one who says it, it's because we know they won't "get it" beyond that. So they should spend their time truly learning those concepts. However, I do believe that students who understand algebra and geometry should continue on because learning higher levels prepares students to choose a wider variety of careers. As much as Schmoker may want colleges to concede that most careers don't need higher level math, it's not going to happen. So adopting an attitude in high school that out students won't need anything beyond geometry is risky. And I'm married to an engineer- they use math at much higher levels than algebra on a regular basis.
July 26, 2011
This book was a suggested reading at my school. I found that the things that were said that I agreed with were that students need more time on task reading in school, and that students need more time writing in school. This is nothing new. For the most part, I disagreed with lots of what was said beyond those two points. Small group instruction is very important, and differentiation is necessary, as not every child learns in the same way. Also, Schmoker seems to think that standardized tests are a really good measure of student achievement, and that students who don't perform well, haven't been taught well. This is preposterous! Some students do well enough on tests, but if looked at individually are not great readers or writers, and some kids don't perform well on tests, but are proficient readers and writers. At the same time, some kids are both good test takers, and good readers/writers. This doesn't prove the validity of standardized tests. If anything it flies in the face of that kind of thinking because it shows that there is no one way to assess student achievement. It is useful to read different ideas about education, and to employ strategies that ring true for the teachers who read them, but there is no one way to teach that can be used without considering lots of other ideas and angles.It is important to see this book for what it is....some useful suggestions, but mostly the opinion of the author. It should not be seen as a curriculum, or as a program.
August 11, 2011
This was an interesting read. I'm sure all of my educator friends out there would appreciate it. While there wasn't a lot of new information in it, it did speak a lot to today's school districts. The message behind this book is stripping away the teaching for standardized testing, and teaching the basics: reading and writing. It reminded me a lot of Donalyn Miller's The Book Whisperer, although I enjoyed her book more and felt like she had better examples of how to teach in the classroom, complete with examples from her own classroom. She also emphasized student choice in her work, which Schmoker doesn't focus on as much. He advocates bringing back the classroom novel, but not killing the book for students by over-teaching from it. I'd definitely enjoy talking this book out with some of my teaching friends out there. I think that the heart of the book is worth recognizing and implementing in the school systems of America. We've got to get away from teaching the tests and get our kids involved in authentic literacy.
February 17, 2011
Initially, I couldn't decide whether I loved or hated this book. By the end I came to appreciate Schmoker's thoughts on instructional practice. Overall, its a strong text for helping practitioners reflect on their own classrooms. I especially enjoyed the conversation about authentic literacy and believe it's an understudied topic in science, history, and math education. I only wish Schmoker provided a little more meat through research data and concrete examples from additional classrooms. I also believe technology is not the evil entity he always depicts and that it can and must be used appropriately in classrooms in 2011.
August 27, 2016
The title aptly describes this text. Schmoker keeps a laser-like focus on three topics throughout the book: A common curriculum, sound lessons, and authentic literacy. It amazes me that this book is needed when we know so much about the importance of these concepts for student learning. Yet it is needed. Schools are so susceptible to the initiaitve du jour. Focus will help teachers and leaders stay the course.
September 19, 2014
I listened to this book on audio which I do not recommend as I found the speaker's voice to be somewhat robotic. There are some valuable nuggets of information in the book, but you could probably focus on your subject area and the introductory info rather than reading the entire book.
August 29, 2015
Wow, another great read for teachers. Would love to read with staff members since a lot of what it suggest would work best school wide.
Read this again and still holds true. Must read for all educators.
Read this again and still holds true. Must read for all educators.
August 19, 2017
This is a colossally refreshing book well worth reading for any teacher or person interested in education! Mike Schmoker gives us a see-through-the-b.s. view on the state of education today and how teachers can improve their teaching. I plan on implementing a lot of these basics in my classroom.
Schmoker is all about teaching the fundamentals and emphasizes the importance of reading and writing. Instead of complicated standards and strategies, he demonstrates that plain old reading, writing, and discussion are the keys. Also, controversially, he downplays math (wants it focus more on statistics, real world problems, slow it down, etc.) and labs in science (too much time wasted, often just following steps, etc.). He cites scholars like Hirsch, Ravitch, and Willingham who I feel have excellent opinions on education as well.
Here are some things I especially liked (spoiler alert):
- "Critical thinking is in fact highly dependent on content knowledge." (pg. 31). AMEN! The idea that we can just "look up the answers" and learn pseudo "skills" are often harmful ideas. Students need to acquire a solid foundation of knowledge across the board to read, write, and talk effectively.
- Standards are often way too convoluted (think Common Core standards) and have many smaller "standards" embedded in them. Instead, focus on meaningful reading, writing, and discussion.
- Technology, many long-term projects, and other bells and whistles are often not worth the investment of time and resources.
- Respect the limit of attention span and memory...he suggests teachers pause for discussion/enrichment after each 5-7 minute chunk of new information. I struggle with this as I tend to like to teach faster and want to move on to the next thing, but it makes sense.
- Maintaining an appropriate atmosphere, discuss controversial and interesting issues. Don't be boring. Include multiple perspectives.
All in all, a great, easy-to-read book for anyone out there interested in education!
Schmoker is all about teaching the fundamentals and emphasizes the importance of reading and writing. Instead of complicated standards and strategies, he demonstrates that plain old reading, writing, and discussion are the keys. Also, controversially, he downplays math (wants it focus more on statistics, real world problems, slow it down, etc.) and labs in science (too much time wasted, often just following steps, etc.). He cites scholars like Hirsch, Ravitch, and Willingham who I feel have excellent opinions on education as well.
Here are some things I especially liked (spoiler alert):
- "Critical thinking is in fact highly dependent on content knowledge." (pg. 31). AMEN! The idea that we can just "look up the answers" and learn pseudo "skills" are often harmful ideas. Students need to acquire a solid foundation of knowledge across the board to read, write, and talk effectively.
- Standards are often way too convoluted (think Common Core standards) and have many smaller "standards" embedded in them. Instead, focus on meaningful reading, writing, and discussion.
- Technology, many long-term projects, and other bells and whistles are often not worth the investment of time and resources.
- Respect the limit of attention span and memory...he suggests teachers pause for discussion/enrichment after each 5-7 minute chunk of new information. I struggle with this as I tend to like to teach faster and want to move on to the next thing, but it makes sense.
- Maintaining an appropriate atmosphere, discuss controversial and interesting issues. Don't be boring. Include multiple perspectives.
All in all, a great, easy-to-read book for anyone out there interested in education!
June 27, 2017
Mike Schmoker delivers a solid guide to improving teaching by focusing on what most teachers would consider the most basic of tasks, including reading and annotating, discussion, and writing. He offers case studies to back up his claims and presents easy-to-follow guidelines to recreate his ideas in the classroom, but (then again) most teachers know exactly what to do.
His guide goes from curriculum to implementation of assignments. His honest approach to what works, what doesn't, and focus on the basics is refreshing from the pinterest-esque current trend in teaching.
This book would make a good book study with all content area teachers. Teachers could read the first part together and break into small groups to discuss content area. They could then come back together for one last debrief of the text.
Overall, this text is worthwhile. If you're a teacher, I really suggest you pick it up before the new year approaches.
His guide goes from curriculum to implementation of assignments. His honest approach to what works, what doesn't, and focus on the basics is refreshing from the pinterest-esque current trend in teaching.
This book would make a good book study with all content area teachers. Teachers could read the first part together and break into small groups to discuss content area. They could then come back together for one last debrief of the text.
Overall, this text is worthwhile. If you're a teacher, I really suggest you pick it up before the new year approaches.
February 10, 2020
Focus is a book about teaching, particularly course design. In short, Schmoker encourages teachers to strip away layers of complicated curriculum that isn't actually effective in favor of a smarter and more streamlined course design that focuses on the essentials.
I've been slowly reading this book for (according to Goodreads) just short of 2 years. I'd read a few pages, and then go rethink some part of what I've been doing in the classroom. After carefully reading all of the bits that apply to my content area (and skimming the other sections), I would highly recommend this book for anyone who teaches at the high school level. I would call it essential reading.
Now, if you'll excuse me... I've got to spend the next 2 years slowly rereading this and re-redesigning my classes.
I've been slowly reading this book for (according to Goodreads) just short of 2 years. I'd read a few pages, and then go rethink some part of what I've been doing in the classroom. After carefully reading all of the bits that apply to my content area (and skimming the other sections), I would highly recommend this book for anyone who teaches at the high school level. I would call it essential reading.
Now, if you'll excuse me... I've got to spend the next 2 years slowly rereading this and re-redesigning my classes.
September 29, 2017
There are some very good ideas regarding literacy across all content areas and some good thoughts about the best methods for constructing a lesson and for re-organizing and simplifying curricular standards. However, the text was very repetitive and a little preachy with several frustrated-sounding asides about the education the author's daughters received. The repeated suggestion that students will love the type of teaching he describes was also questionable, especially if the structure never varies much.
The positives of the book definitely make it worth reading and discussion, but I found myself skimming through the redundant passages, especially in the second half of the book.
The positives of the book definitely make it worth reading and discussion, but I found myself skimming through the redundant passages, especially in the second half of the book.
May 28, 2019
Once I got over what I felt was a call to a literary canon - white, male dominated I’m sure, I deeply appreciated Schmoker’s demand for going back to the fundamentals of teaching, particularly in English, but also across the board. His argument is saturated with research, observations and data. It is repetitive but with good reason - he is giving a countercultural message that has to bust through a few walls. I agreed with his recommendation of slashing standards and benchmarks and focusing on the big picture instead of nit picking. Definitely taken a few of his ideas to heart for next year.
August 3, 2018
There were some good reminders in this book-- don't overcomplicate things, be consistent in the most basic practices that any education program worth its salt teaches you. I think a couple blog posts would have sufficed rather than writing an entire book on this topic. It didn't feel like an appropriate medium for what he was trying to say. I also wish Schmoker would diversify his examples and cite a more diverse group of researchers.
June 5, 2018
Good teacher book. It has the basics and for those math teachers, it has something special for you too. I didn't bother reading everything since I'm not math but if I was assisting a math teacher I'd hand this over to them too. Schmoker helped me in my 1st year of teaching so I can't disregard that.
June 22, 2022
Some good reminders on reducing the number of standards taught and teaching them with a focus on learning. Also love his thoughts on incorporating more reading and writing into all disciplines. I found his thoughts on foundational literacy skills a bit cavalier in light of the issues with balanced literacy many primary classrooms are facing. But overall some great takeaways.
March 28, 2024
It’s difficult to love a book that basically says I do everything wrong. Teaching with tech is wrong. Using curriculum is wrong. Trying to hit all of the standards is wrong. There was some good stuff and some valid points. The teaching strategies were valid.
It’s just not the only way.
I’ll keep the book on my shelf but it won’t be my curriculum bible.
It’s just not the only way.
I’ll keep the book on my shelf but it won’t be my curriculum bible.
December 22, 2017
It was better that I thought it would be. It has some practical advice for getting students more involved in learning and doesn't fall into the trap of blaming any one group for what so many see as failure of education in our society.
April 20, 2018
Important and Engaging book for educators
If teachers can implement these strategies even reasonably well, we would see dramatic improvement in schools. I am considering how I can start to implement his suggestions, immediately.
If teachers can implement these strategies even reasonably well, we would see dramatic improvement in schools. I am considering how I can start to implement his suggestions, immediately.
July 6, 2019
This book has a lot of good points for teaching. I found it relevant and powerful. We have too many standards. We should eschew all the foo-foo activities for what is important and works...reading, writing, and discussing over and over and over in all of the disciplines.
March 4, 2024
Had to read for school, so we might as well count it. I agreed with the overall thesis, but I do think he neglects to recognize some of the challenges to his simple approach in the current educational landscape.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 164 reviews