By Jill Jackson

    There are two main components that underpin quality instruction: the context and the content. The context is the how of teaching, and the content is the what of teaching.   

    When you look at the context of quality instruction, you see that it has two components: classroom management and student engagement. Both management and engagement are totally and completely required in order for students to master the content of any lesson. Without the context in place, you’re just “teaching the lesson” with no focus on how well students are learning or engaging with the content. 

    It is not uncommon to overhear two teachers having a conversation in the staff room in which one teacher laments, “I taught that; I just don’t know why they didn’t pass the test!” This is a sign that, perhaps, the teacher taught the content but didn’t plan to monitor behaviors and engage the students. Let’s be clear: the teacher is responsible for engaging students—if we leave whether or not to engage up to the students, we are in deep trouble!

    When teachers have a solid behavioral and classroom management system in place and expect that students will follow that system, they get more teaching done and more content taught. Why? Because high levels of classroom management are directly related to a teacher’s ability to instruct at a swift pace. Now, I’m not saying that because certain teachers have a good management system they are automatically engaging their students at a high level. But I am saying that it is necessary for teachers to have a solid management system in order for content to be learned in their classrooms. There is no shortcut to management.

    Once a management system is in place, the teacher must work on engaging students in responding to and relating to the content. There are several ways to know if students are engaged: they are saying something about the content, they are writing something about the content, and/or they are doing something physical in response to the content (raising a hand to vote for a concept or giving a thumbs-up/thumbs-down response to a question, for example). 

    Without ways to measure (verbal, written, or physical) engagement, we can mistake engagement for kids sitting really quietly. In fact, we have quite a few teachers who believe that engagement equals sustained, silent staring. I’m here to set the record straight: if you want to know whether kids are engaged, you can only determine their engagement levels by the actions they are taking. There is no way to measure engagement when kids are sitting quietly! 

    In fact, we know that the more engagement we have, the fewer behavior problems we see. And the fewer behavior problems we see, the more time we have to teach the content. And the more time we have to teach, model, practice, and apply the content, the more students will master.

    Yes! That issue of “not enough time to teach my grade-level standards” goes away when we get a handle on the classroom management and engagement. And to think, all of this before we’ve even talked about the content itself! 

    So often I will see well-meaning coaches skip over the very obvious need for coaching on classroom management with a teacher because they’re so focused on getting to Standard 5.9! When this happens, the teacher and coach often have to double back and fix management and engagement issues in the end, wasting coaching and preparation time. Focusing on context first allows the coach and teacher to clear the debris to make way for efficient and effective instruction.

    Jill Jackson is known for telling it like it really is as she works to simplify and demystify the oft-confusing work of school improvement. She recently wrote Get a Backbone, Principal! 5 Conversations Every School Leader Must Have Right Now and blogs at www.jackson-consulting.com Mondays and Thursdays.