Content uploaded by Douglas Fisher
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Douglas Fisher on Oct 12, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Effective Use of
the Gradual Release
of Responsibility Model
By
Dr. Douglas Fisher
Professor of Language and Literacy Education
San Diego State University
Evidence on effective instruction is
accumulating at an amazing rate.
We know that all learners need
purposeful instruction in reading
skills and strategies, motivation
to read, access to a wide
variety of texts, and authentic
opportunities to read and write
both inside and outside of school
(Farstrup & Samuels, 2002; Fink
& Samuels, 2008). We also know
that students need to develop
their expertise in all aspects of
reading and writing, including
oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics,
vocabulary, fl uency, and comprehension (Frey &
Fisher, 2006). And we also know that the skills of
the teacher, and how the teacher uses valuable
instructional time, matters.
This evidence on effective literacy teaching,
which includes small group instruction,
differentiation, and a response to intervention,
presents a challenge for many teachers and
schools. Clearly, whole-class instruction will not
work to improve the literacy achievement of our
children. To be effective, teachers have engaged
students in purposeful instruction designed to
meet the needs of individual and smaller groups
of students.
The Gradual Release of
Responsibility Model
A common way that teachers can
do this is to use a gradual release
of responsibility model (Pearson
& Gallagher, 1983). The gradual
release of responsibility model
of instruction requires that the
teacher shift from assuming “all
the responsibility for performing
a task … to a situation in which
the students assume all of the
responsibility” (Duke & Pearson,
2002, p. 211). This gradual release
may occur over a day, a week, a month, or a
year. Stated another way, the gradual release of
responsibility “… emphasizes instruction that
mentors students into becoming capable thinkers
and learners when handling the tasks with which
they have not yet developed expertise” (Buehl,
2005).
The gradual release of responsibility model of
instruction has been documented as an effective
approach for improving literacy achievement
(Fisher & Frey, 2007), reading comprehension
(Lloyd, 2004), and literacy outcomes for English
language learners (Kong & Pearson, 2003).
oral language, phonemic awareness, phonics,
6641_Douglas_Fisher_4pg.indd 1 12/2/08 10:19:42 AM
Components of the Gradual Release of
Responsibility Model
As delineated in the visual representation in
Figure 1 (Fisher & Frey, 2008), there are four
interactive (or interrelated) components of a
gradual release of responsibility model:
• Focus Lessons. This component allows
the teacher to model his or her thinking and
understanding of the content for students.
Usually brief in nature, focus lessons establish the
purpose or intended learning outcome and clue
students into the standards they are learning.
In addition to the purpose and the teacher
model, the focus lesson provides teachers and
opportunity to build and/or activate background
knowledge.
• Guided Instruction. During guided
instruction, teachers prompt,
question, facilitate, or lead
students through tasks that
increase their understanding
of the content. While this can,
and sometimes does, occur with
the whole class, the evidence
is clear that reading instruction
necessitates small group
instruction. Guided instruction
provides teachers an opportunity
to address needs identifi ed
on formative assessments and
directly instruct students in
specifi c literacy components,
skills, or strategies.
• Collaborative Learning. To consolidate
their understanding of the content, students
need opportunities to problem solve, discuss,
negotiate, and think with their peers.
Collaborative learning opportunities, such as
workstations ensure that students practice and
apply their learning while interacting with their
peers. This phase is critical as students must
use language if they are to learn it. The key to
collaborative learning, or productive group work
as it is sometimes called, lies in the nature of the
task. Ideally each collaborative learning task will
have a group function combined with a way to
ensure individual accountability such that the
teacher knows what each student did while at
the workstation.
• Independent work. As the goal of all of
our instruction, independent learning provides
students practice with applying information
in new ways. In doing so, students synthesize
information, transform ideas, and solidify their
understanding.
Importantly, the gradual release of responsibility
model is not linear. Students move back and
forth between each of the components as they
master skills, strategies, and standards.
How is the Gradual Release of
Responsibility Used?
The gradual release of responsibility model
provides teachers with an instructional
framework for moving from teacher knowledge
to student understanding and application. The
gradual release of responsibility model ensures
that students are supported in
their acquisition of the skills and
strategies necessary for success.
Implementing the gradual
release of responsibility model
requires time. Instructional
planning can consume hours of
a teacher’s time. As teachers,
we have to plan for a diverse
group of learners, students
learning English, students who
fi nd reading easy and those
who struggle, and students who
need strategic intervention to be
successful. As part of a gradual
release of responsibility model, curriculum must
be vertically aligned. Our students do not have
time to waste on skills and strategies they have
already mastered. Similarly, without strong
vertical alignment as part of the gradual release
of responsibility model, skills can be missed.
What is vertical alignment?
Vertical alignment is both a process and an
outcome, the result of which is a comprehensive
curriculum that provides learners with a coherent
sequence of content. Vertical alignment
ensures that content standards and reading
skills and strategies are introduced, reinforced,
and assessed. Vertical alignment guarantees
“As part of a gradual
release of responsibility
model, curriculum must
be vertically aligned.”
EFFECTIVE U S E O F THE G RADUAL R ELEASE O F R ESPONSIBILITY M ODELEFFECTIVE U S E O F THE G RADUAL R ELEASE O F R ESPONSIBILITY M ODEL
6641_Douglas_Fisher_4pg.indd 2 12/2/08 10:19:43 AM
that instruction is targeted on the intersection
between student needs and content standards.
In curricula with strong vertical alignment,
content redundancy is reduced and the
curriculum is rigorous and challenging.
Why is vertical alignment important?
First and foremost, strong vertical alignment
accommodates a wide variety of developmental
levels and is designed to increase the
intellectual, personal, physical, social, and career
development of all students. Vertical alignment
allows teachers increased precision in their
teaching because they are not teaching content
that is covered elsewhere or that students have
mastered previously. Vertical alignment also
ensures that specifi c content standards are
not entirely missed as a teacher at one grade
assumes someone else focused on that content.
Conclusion
With strong vertical alignment and purposeful
instruction, students learn. While there are many
reasons that children struggle with reading
and writing, there are not endless numbers
of solutions. Students who fi nd literacy tasks
diffi cult deserve increased attention from their
teachers, quality reading materials, and authentic
opportunities to read and write. If we provide
them with these essentials, we can expect great
things. If we do not, we cannot expect students
to know themselves or their world.
References
Buehl, D, “Scaffolding,” Reading Room, 2005,
<www.weac.org/News/2005-06/sept05/
readingroomoct05.htm> (November 11,
2006).
Duke, N. K. and P. D. Pearson, “Effective
Practices for Developing Reading
Comprehension,” in A. E. Farstup & S. J.
Samuels (eds.), What Research has to Say
About Reading Instruction, International
Reading Association, Newark, Delaware,
2002, pp. 205-242.
Farstrup, A. E. and S. J. Samuels (eds.), What
the Research has to Say About Reading
Instruction, 3rd ed., International Reading
Association, Newark, Delaware, 2002.
Fink, R. and S. J. Samuels (eds.), Inspiring
Reading Success: Interest and Motivation in
an Age of High-Stakes Testing, International
Reading Association, Newark, Delaware,
2008.
Fisher, D. and N. Frey, “Implementing a
Schoolwide Literacy Framework: Improving
Achievement in an Urban Elementary
School,” The Reading Teacher, 61, 2007, pp.
32-45.
Fisher, D. and N. Frey, Better Learning Through
Structured Teaching: A Framework for
the Gradual Release of Responsibility,
Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, Alexandria, Virginia, 2008.
Frey, N. and D. Fisher, Language Arts Workshop:
Purposeful Reading and Writing Instruction,
Merrill Education, Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey, 2006.
Kong, A. and P. D. Pearson, “The Road to
Participation: The Construction of a Literacy
Practice in a Learning Community of
Linguistically Diverse Learners,” Research in
the Teaching of English, 38, 2003, pp. 85-
124.
Lloyd, S. L., “Using Comprehension Strategies as
a Springboard for Student Talk,” Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48, 2004, pp.
114-124.
Pearson, P. D. and M. C. Gallagher, “The
Instruction of Reading Comprehension,”
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8,
1983, pp. 317-344.
EFFECTIVE U S E O F THE G RADUAL R ELEASE O F R ESPONSIBILITY M ODELEFFECTIVE U S E O F THE G RADUAL R ELEASE O F R ESPONSIBILITY M ODEL
6641_Douglas_Fisher_4pg.indd 3 12/2/08 10:19:44 AM
RD 08 W 6641
12/08 10M
EFFECTIVE U S E O F THE G RADUAL R ELEASE O F R ESPONSIBILITY M ODEL
Teacher Responsibility
Figure 1
Focus Lesson
Guided
Instruction
Collaborative
Independent “You do it
alone”
“You do it
together”
“We do it”
“I do it”
6641_Douglas_Fisher_4pg.indd 4 12/2/08 10:19:45 AM
