1. Visible Learning for Literacy
Doug Fisher
Visible Learning for Literacy

2. Every student deserves a great teacher, not by chance, but by design.

4. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error =
Rank: /136
Number of meta-analyses:
Number of studies:
Number of participants:
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

5. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = n/a
Rank: 136/136
Number of meta-analyses: 7
Number of studies: 207
Number of participants: 13,938
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

6. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = (low)
Rank: 125/136
Number of meta-analyses: 2
Number of studies: 92
Number of participants: n/a
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

7. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Std. error = (low)
Rank: 88/136
Number of meta-analyses: 5
Number of studies: 161
Number of effects: 295
Number of participants: 105,282
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

8. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = (high)
Rank: 58/136
Number of meta-analyses: 8
Number of studies: 674
Number of participants: n/a
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

9. This is the hinge point –
a year’s worth of growth for a year in school.

10. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Std. error = (low)
Rank: 88/136
Number of meta-analyses: 5
Number of studies: 161
Number of effects: 295
Number of participants: 105,282
Mobility: d = -.34
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

11. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = n/a
Rank: 136/136
Number of meta-analyses: 7
Number of studies: 207
Number of participants: 13,938
Retention: d =
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

12. Ability Grouping/Tracking: d = 0.12
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = 0.045
Rank: 112/136
Number of meta-analyses: 14
Number of studies: 500
Number of participants: 1,369
Ability Grouping/Tracking: d = 0.12
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

13. Teaching test taking: d = .22
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Std. error = (low)
Rank: 88/136
Number of meta-analyses: 5
Number of studies: 161
Number of effects: 295
Number of participants: 105,282
Teaching test taking: d = .22
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

14. Small group learning: d = 0.49
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = n/a
Rank: 48/136
Number of meta-analyses: 2
Number of studies: 78
Number of participants: 3,472
Small group learning: d = 0.49
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

15. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = n/a
Rank: 48/136
Number of meta-analyses: 2
Number of studies: 78
Number of participants: 3,472
Study Skills: d = 0.59
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

16. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error =
Rank:
Number of meta-analyses:
Number of studies:
Number of participants: 5,028
Repeated Reading: d = 0.67
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

17. Classroom Discussion: d = 0.82
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error =
Rank:
Number of meta-analyses:
Number of studies:
Number of participants: 677
Classroom Discussion: d = 0.82
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

18. Collective Teacher Efficacy: d = 1.57
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error =
Rank:
Number of meta-analyses:
Number of studies:
Number of participants: 677
Collective Teacher Efficacy: d = 1.57
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

19. Every student deserves a great teacher, not by chance, but by design.

20. 2. Cultivating the Learning Climate
1. Planning with Purpose
2. Cultivating the Learning Climate
3. Instructing with Intention
4. Assessing with a System
5. Impacting Student Learning

23. Learning Progressions Evidence of Learning Meaningful Learning
Transfer
Links
Lesson-specific
Content
Language
Evidence of Learning
Success criteria
Evidence collection
Meaningful Learning
Aligned
Differentiated

24. Teachers know what students need to learn
Teachers communicate learning intentions to students
Teachers and students understand success criteria

25. 0.5
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
Medium
0.8
0.1
High
0.9
Low
0.0
1.0
Teacher effects
1.1
-0.1
Developmental effects
Negative
1.2
-0.2
Reverse effects
Zone of desired effects
Standard error = (Medium)
Rank: 3/136
Number of meta-analyses: 2
Number of studies: 30
Number of participants: 3835
Teacher Clarity: d = 0.75
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement.
New York: Routledge.

26. The established purpose
focuses on student learning, rather than an activity, assignment, or task.

28. Three Questions What am I learning today? Why am I learning this?
How will I know that I have learned it?
p. 27

29. Teachers know what students need to learn
Teachers communicate learning intentions to students
Teachers and students understand success criteria

30. Sara explained the writing rubric, used reasoning to argue her status, and conveyed a set of experiences about writers at each level.

31. p. 31

33. Collaborative Learning
Clear learning intentions
Relevant Learning intentions
Accurate representation
Focused Instruction
Noticing
Scaffolding
Prompting, Cueing, and Questioning
Guided Instruction
Collaborative Learning
Routines
Task complexity
Language support

34. TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY
“I do it”
Focused Instruction
Guided Instruction
“We do it”
“You do it
together”
Collaborative
“You do it
alone”
Independent
STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY

35. Transfer
Deep
Surface
p. 20

36. Surface
Skill and Concept Development
p. 20

37. Connections, relationships and schema to organize skills and concepts
Deep
Surface
Skill and Concept Development
p. 20

38. Transfer
Self-regulation to continue learning skills and content, applying knowledge to novel situations
Connections, relationships and schema to organize skills and concepts
Deep
Surface
Skill and Concept Development
p. 20

39. What Works
When

40. Surface Learning is IMPORTANT

41. Ways to Facilitate Surface Learning
Leveraging prior knowledge (d=0.65)
Vocabulary techniques (sorts, word cards, etc.) (d=0.67)
Reading Comprehension Instruction (d=0.60)
Wide reading on the topic under study (d=0.42)
Summarizing (d=0.63)

42. Reading Volume Still Matters

43. STUDENT A 20 MINUTES PER DAY 1,800,000 WORDS PER YEAR
SCORES IN THE 90TH PERCENTILE ON STANDARDIZED TESTS

44. STUDENT B 5 MINUTES PER DAY 282,000 WORDS PER YEAR
SCORES IN THE 50TH PERCENTILE ON STANDARDIZED TESTS

45. STUDENT C 1 MINUTE PER DAY 8,000 WORDS PER YEAR
SCORES IN THE 10TH PERCENTILE ON STANDARDIZED TESTS

46. Surface
Skill and Concept Development

47. Deep Learning is Also Important

48. Ways to Facilitate Deep Learning
Concept mapping (d=0.60)
Class Discussion (d=0.82)
Questioning (d=0.48)
Metacognitive strategies (d=0.69)
Reciprocal teaching (d=0.74)

49. Deep learning approaches don’t work any better at developing surface learning than surface learning strategies work to develop deep understanding.

50. Discussion Roundtable
1 My notes
What ___ said 3
What ___ said 4 5
Independent
Summary
Deep Acquisition and Deep Consolidation p

51. Graphic organizers and concept maps are an intermediate step to something else —discussion or writing.

52. Without more complex tasks, students will not deepen their learning.

53. Task complexity should align with
the phase of learning.

54. Difficulty v. Complexity
A measure of effort required to complete a task.
In assessment, a function of how many people can complete the task correctly.
A measure of the thinking, action, or knowledge that is needed to complete the task.
In assessment, how many different ways can the task be accomplished.

57. Marc Umile is among a group of people fascinated with pi, a number that has been computed to more than a trillion decimal places. He has recited pi to 15,314 digits.

58. Fluency More Complex Expertise Easy Stamina Strategic Thinking Hard
Low Difficulty
High Complexity
High Difficulty
High Complexity
Easy
Hard
Low Difficulty
Low Complexity
High Difficulty
Low Complexity
Fluency
Stamina
Less Complex
p. 25

59. Connections, relationships and schema to organize skills and concepts
Deep
Surface
Skill and Concept Development

60. Transfer

61. “The ability to transfer is arguably the long-term aim of all education. You truly understand and excel when you can take what you have learned in one way or context and use it in another, on your own.”
McTighe & Wiggins, 2011

62. Ways to Facilitate Transfer
Reading across documents to conceptually organize (d=0.85)
Formal discussion, including debates and Socratic seminars (d=0.82)
Problem-solving teaching (d=0.61)
Extended writing (d=0.43)
Peer tutoring (d=.55)

64. Rules, routines, procedures Recordkeeping
Welcome
Positive regard
Physical environment
Community building
Growth Producing
Agency and identity
Academic risk taking
Repairs harm
Efficient Operations
Rules, routines, procedures
Recordkeeping

66. Assessment to… Support Learners Monitor Learning Inform Learning
Comprehensible
Goal-setting
Checks for understanding
Error analysis
Types of feedback
Usefulness
Needs-based instruction
Assessment to…

67. Feed up: establishing purpose
Check for understanding: daily monitoring of learning
Feed back: providing students with information about their success and needs
Feed forward: using student performance for “next steps” instruction and feeding this into an instructional model
Fisher & Frey, 2009

68. Feed forward
Where to next?

69. Feeding forward involves… Misconception analysis Error analysis
Error coding

71. 2. Cultivating the Learning Climate
1. Planning with Purpose
2. Cultivating the Learning Climate
3. Instructing with Intention
4. Assessing with a System
5. Impacting Student Learning