📢 SY 2026–27 Alignment: This PD series directly supports CKLA implementation — explicit teaching is the instructional model CKLA's Skills Strand and Knowledge Strand are built on.
The greatest source of variance in student achievement is the teacher. The question is not whether the teacher makes a difference — it's what kind of difference.
— John Hattie, Visible Learning (2009)

John Hattie's Visible Learning is a synthesis of over 1,800 meta-analyses covering more than 300 million students across the globe — the most comprehensive dataset on what works in education ever assembled. The core question: among all the things schools and teachers do, which ones actually have a significant impact on student learning?

The answer, distilled: teacher mindframes and deliberate instructional practices matter more than anything else. Curriculum, technology, class size, and policy are all secondary to what happens between a teacher and a learner in the moment of instruction.

0.40
The Hinge Point
Average effect of all interventions. Strategies above d=0.40 are worth prioritizing.
1,800+
Meta-analyses synthesized
Covering K–12 across all subjects and continents
1.17
Effect of Teacher clarity
Nearly 3× the average. One of the highest-impact strategies in the dataset.
How to Read an Effect Size (d)

d < 0.20 — Negligible effect. Don't prioritize.
d = 0.20–0.40 — Small effect. Below the hinge point — student growth would happen anyway.
d = 0.40 — The hinge point. Average of all 1,800+ meta-analyses.
d = 0.40–0.60 — Medium effect. Worth doing deliberately.
d > 0.60 — Large effect. These are the strategies to build your practice around.
d > 1.0 — Very large effect. Transformative when implemented with fidelity.

The single most important finding from Visible Learning is not a strategy — it's a mindset. Teachers who see themselves as evaluators of their own impact on learning, rather than deliverers of content, produce dramatically different outcomes.
The 10 Mind Frames
1. My fundamental task is to evaluate my impact.
2. Success and failure in learning is about what I did.
3. I talk about learning, not teaching.
4. I build relationships and trust with students.
5. I engage and am engaged with feedback.
6. I inform all about the language of learning.
7. I see learning as hard work.
8. I collaborate and seek feedback about my impact.
9. I engage in dialogue rather than monologue.
10. I have high expectations for all students.
Why Mind Frame #1 Is the Foundation

Teachers with Mind Frame #1 ask "What is my evidence that these students are learning?" after every lesson — not "Did I cover the content?"

This shift from delivery-thinking to impact-thinking is the foundation of explicit teaching. You can use all the right techniques and still not be an explicit teacher if you're not monitoring, adjusting, and evaluating your effect.

Visible Learning at GES — Connection Points
🎯 CKLA Skills Strand = explicit phonics instruction (d=0.60+)
📚 CKLA Knowledge Strand = teacher clarity + prior knowledge activation
📊 DIBELS / FC data = teacher as evaluator of own impact
🔄 Station A design = direct instruction + guided practice
Explicit teaching does not mean telling students everything. It means making the learning visible — to the student and to the teacher.
— Hattie & Donoghue, Learning Strategies: A Synthesis and Conceptual Model (2016)
Feature Explicit Teaching (what Hattie means) Didactic Teaching (the misconception)
Who has the learning target?Student AND teacher — shared, visible, understoodTeacher only — students guess what they're supposed to learn
What does the teacher do?Models thinking, demonstrates strategies, provides corrective feedbackTransmits information; student is passive recipient
How is success defined?Clear success criteria known to students before the taskSuccess defined by task completion, not learning evidence
What happens when students struggle?Teacher responds with more explicit instruction, not more practiceStudent told to try again with the same approach
Role of student voice?Central — dialogue, questioning, checking understandingMinimal — answer checking, not sense-making
Effect size (Hattie)d = 0.60 (Explicit teaching) · d = 1.17 (Teacher clarity)d = 0.22 (Passive learning) · much below hinge

Hattie identifies eight phases that distinguish effective explicit teaching from mere delivery. These are not steps in a rigid sequence — they are conditions to create within a lesson. A single lesson may cycle through several of them more than once.

1
Intention & Success Criteria
Before instruction begins — the most powerful setup move
What it looks like:
Teacher states the learning intention in student-friendly language. Success criteria are co-constructed or displayed — students can say what good work looks like before they begin. The purpose is for students to understand where they are headed, not just what they will do.
CKLA connection:
Skills Strand: "Today I'll learn how to read words with the /ow/ pattern." Success criteria: "I can read 5 words accurately."

Knowledge Strand: "Today I'll understand why the Nile River mattered to Ancient Egypt." Success criteria: "I can give two reasons using details from the text."
2
Prior Knowledge Activation
Connecting new learning to what students already know — effect d=0.93
The brain learns by connecting new information to existing schema. Activation of prior knowledge is not just a warm-up — it is a cognitive necessity. Without it, new information has nowhere to anchor. Hattie's research shows prior knowledge activation is one of the most powerful things a teacher can do before introducing new content (d=0.93).

Key teacher moves: Think-pair-share about what students already know · Vocabulary pre-assessment (Knowledge Rating Scale) · Brief discussion: "What does this remind you of?" · Activating through questions, not just statements

3
Direct Instruction — I Do
The teacher models thinking aloud — not just doing
The teacher explicitly models the skill, strategy, or content — narrating their thinking as they go. This is metacognitive modeling, not just demonstration. Students observe both the product and the process.

Think-aloud formula:
"I'm going to read this word. I see the letters ow. I know that pattern says /ow/. So this word says... 'glow.' Let me check — does that make sense? Yes."

Critical DON'Ts during I Do:
✗ Don't ask comprehension questions during modeling — it breaks the cognitive flow
✗ Don't rush — students need to see and hear the complete thinking process
✗ Don't hide struggles — modeling productive struggle is as important as modeling success
✗ Don't skip this phase when students seem to "already know" — confirm first
4
Guided Practice — We Do
Gradual release: teacher and student think together
The teacher and students practice together. The teacher provides prompts and scaffolds but students are doing the cognitive work. This is where errors are caught and corrected immediately — not after the fact. Hattie's research confirms that corrective feedback during guided practice is among the most powerful in-lesson moves (d=0.70).

Effective prompting during We Do:
"Try this one — what do you notice first?" · "You got that part — now what comes next?" · "That's close — look at the second syllable again." · "Tell me your thinking before you write."

When to return to I Do:
If more than 30% of students are making the same error during We Do, stop and re-model. This is not failure — it is teaching. Re-teaching in response to data is exactly what Hattie's research validates.

5–8
Independent Practice · Consolidation · Transfer · Metacognition
Surface → Deep → Transfer: the full learning arc
Phase 5 — Independent Practice (You Do)
Students apply the skill without scaffolding. The teacher monitors and collects data. Independent practice is only assigned when students have demonstrated understanding — not as a vehicle for initial learning.
Phase 6 — Consolidation
Connecting new learning to prior knowledge and to other contexts. Summary writing, review, elaboration. This is how surface learning becomes durable memory.
Phase 7 — Transfer
Applying what was learned in a new, different context. The ultimate test of deep learning. Many students can perform in the original context but fail to transfer — this is a teaching problem, not a student problem.
Phase 8 — Metacognition
Students reflect on their own learning: what worked, what's still uncertain, what strategy they used. Metacognition d=0.69 — one of the most underused strategies at the elementary level.

The most common mistake in explicit teaching is treating all learning as the same. Hattie's research distinguishes three phases of learning — surface, deep, and transfer — each requiring different instructional approaches. Teaching surface-level content with deep-learning strategies (discovery, inquiry, debate) is a mismatch that reduces effectiveness. So is using surface-level drills when students need transfer practice.

What it is
Building a foundational understanding of new concepts, vocabulary, and facts. The goal is acquisition and fluency — students need to know it AND be able to access it quickly.
Best strategies (highest d)
Direct Instruction (d=0.60)
Spaced Practice (d=0.65)
Vocabulary Instruction (d=0.67)
Worked Examples (d=0.57)
Prior Knowledge Activation (d=0.93)
CKLA at Surface Phase
Skills Strand phonics lessons · Knowledge Strand vocabulary introduction · Decodable reader first read · Domain vocabulary pre-teaching · Knowledge wall building
What it is
Connecting concepts, comparing ideas, understanding relationships between facts. Deep learning is where meaning is constructed — not just known. Students can explain, apply, and think with the content.
Best strategies (highest d)
Self-Questioning (d=0.64)
Elaborative Interrogation (d=0.48)
Concept Mapping (d=0.60)
Summarization (d=0.50)
Reciprocal Teaching (d=0.74)
CKLA at Deep Phase
Text-dependent discussion · Knowledge wall expansion · Written response to reading · Concept mapping domain vocabulary · Partner teaching activities
What it is
Applying learning in new contexts, across subjects, or to novel problems. Transfer is the highest goal — it means students own the learning, not just the context in which it was taught.
Best strategies (highest d)
Problem-Solving (d=0.61)
Metacognitive Strategies (d=0.69)
Self-Regulation (d=0.52)
Creativity / Analogy (d=0.65)
Teaching Others (d=0.55)
CKLA at Transfer Phase
Independent writing using domain content · Cross-domain connections · Application to real-world contexts · Student-led discussion without teacher scaffolding · Teaching another student
The Most Common Mismatch in Elementary Classrooms

Teachers often use deep learning strategies (Socratic discussion, open-ended inquiry, creative tasks) when students are still at the surface phase — they don't yet have the foundational knowledge to engage meaningfully. The result: louder, busier classrooms with lower achievement gains.

Equally damaging: keeping students in surface-level drill when they're ready for deep or transfer — robbing them of the connections that make learning stick.

The fix: Use formative data to identify which phase each student group is in. Station A (teacher-led) should target the phase of the students in that group — not the phase the teacher is most comfortable teaching.

How to use this toolkit: Focus your instructional energy above the hinge point (d > 0.40). Strategies below it aren't harmful — they just don't produce the accelerated growth that explicit teaching does. The dark blue bars mark strategies that are closest to what you already do at GES — these are worth deepening first.

Very High Effect (d>0.70) High Effect (d 0.50–0.70) At/Above Hinge (d 0.40–0.50) Below Hinge (d<0.40)
  • 1Teacher clarity
    1.17
  • 2Feedback (teacher to student)
    0.70
  • 3Prior knowledge activation
    0.93
  • 4Reciprocal teaching
    0.74
  • 5Metacognitive strategies
    0.69
  • 6Vocabulary instruction
    0.67
  • 7Spaced/distributed practice
    0.65
  • 8Direct instruction
    0.60
  • 9Concept mapping
    0.60
  • 10Problem-solving teaching
    0.61
  • 11Self-questioning
    0.64
  • 12Worked examples
    0.57
  • 13Summarization
    0.50
  • 14Classroom discussion
    0.82
  • 15Elaborative interrogation
    0.48
  • 16Mastery learning
    0.55
  • 17Deliberate practice
    0.47
  • 18Formative evaluation
    0.90
  • 19Writing to learn
    0.42
  • 20Cooperative learning
    0.41
  • 21Homework (K–5)
    0.29
  • 22Class size reduction
    0.21
  • 23Open/Discovery learning
    0.23
  • 24Ability grouping (rigid)
    0.12
  • 25Retention / Holding back a grade
    -0.16
🟢 Start / Deepen — Highest ROI

Teacher clarity (1.17): Every lesson needs a visible learning intention + success criteria that students can access and use.

Formative evaluation (0.90): Checking understanding during instruction — not at the end. Weekly DIBELS, exit tickets, station data, FC minutes.

Prior knowledge activation (0.93): Non-negotiable before every new CKLA unit or math concept. This is where the lesson lives or dies.

Feedback (0.70): Specific, corrective, immediate. Praise is not feedback. "Try again" is not feedback. "You read 'slow' — look at the vowels again: o-w says /ow/" is feedback.

🔴 Reduce Reliance — Low or Negative Effect

Open/Discovery learning (0.23): Students exploring without explicit instruction first. Surface-phase learners need structure before exploration.

Ability grouping — rigid (0.12): Permanent ability groups suppress growth. Data-driven flexible grouping (changing by skill) is different and more effective.

Homework K–5 (0.29): Below the hinge. Practice time in school with feedback produces far greater gains than independent home practice.

Grade retention (-0.16): Negative effect. An intervention plan within the current grade is always preferable.

📅 60 minutes 👥 Whole group + grade-band pairs 🎯 Surface phase: I Do / We Do / You Do 📋 Materials: sticky notes, chart paper
0–5 min
Whole Group
Opening Hook — The Invisible Lesson
Facilitator teaches a 3-minute lesson in an unfamiliar topic (e.g., knot-tying, a short phrase in German) using implicit instruction only — no learning intention, no modeling, just activity. Then reveals a second version of the same content using explicit instruction. Ask: "What was different about your experience?" This makes the research immediately personal.

Facilitator notes: Don't tell staff what you're doing before the first version. The contrast is the point.
5–15 min
Whole Group · Research Input
Hattie's Hinge Point — The d=0.40 Framework
Present the Effect Size Toolkit (5 min). Key messages: (1) Average growth happens anyway — d=0.40 is the floor, not the goal. (2) Teacher clarity is the #1 lever. (3) The three things you can do tomorrow that move the needle most.

Use the effect size visualization on the Effect Size tab. Give staff 2 minutes to find the strategy they already use and identify its effect size. Brief partner share.
15–25 min
Grade-Band Pairs
Learning Intention Lab — Write, Test, Refine
Each pair takes a lesson they're teaching this week and writes three versions of the learning intention: (A) as currently written, (B) rewritten as a student-facing "I can" statement, (C) version B + 2–3 success criteria students can self-assess against.

Facilitator debrief question: "Which version would your lowest-achieving student understand without you explaining it?" That's the target.

Grade-band differentiation: K–1 pairs work on phonics lesson intentions. Gr 2–3 on CKLA knowledge domain intentions. Gr 4–5 on writing task intentions.
25–40 min
Partner Activity
Think-Aloud Micro-Teach — Model the Thinking
Each person teaches a 3-minute I Do to their partner using think-aloud narration. Partner uses the observer sheet to note: (1) What teacher move did they see? (2) Did the teacher narrate the thinking or just the doing? (3) What would they add?

Grade-band examples:
K–1: Decode a CKLA decodable word with full phoneme think-aloud
Gr 2–3: Model a text-dependent question response using think-aloud
Gr 4–5: Model an elaborative writing move with explicit reasoning narration

Facilitator notes: Circulate and listen for teachers who "show" without narrating the cognitive process. Prompt: "What were you thinking when you did that part?"
40–52 min
Whole Group Debrief
What Made It Explicit? Naming the Moves
Gallery-style share: each pair posts their "biggest insight" from the micro-teach on a sticky note. Facilitator groups by theme (clarity / feedback / prior knowledge / modeling) and names the Hattie categories.

Key debrief questions:
• "What's the difference between showing and thinking aloud?"
• "When did you feel most certain as the learner? What caused that certainty?"
• "What's one move you'll make in Monday's lesson?"
52–60 min
Individual Commitment
Between-Session Commitment
Each teacher writes two commitments for the next 2 weeks:
(1) Learning Intention commitment: "In every lesson I will write the learning intention as a student-facing 'I can' statement with at least two success criteria students can see."
(2) Think-Aloud commitment: "In at least two lessons per week I will narrate my thinking aloud during the I Do phase."

Collect commitment cards. Return them at Session 2 for self-reflection. This is not accountability pressure — it is a research-validated commitment device (self-regulation d=0.52).
Must-Land Insight #1

Explicit teaching is not the same as lecture. The teacher who talks the most is often being the least explicit. Explicit means the learning is visible to the student — not that the teacher is visible to the student.

Must-Land Insight #2

Teacher clarity at d=1.17 means: when students know exactly what they are learning, why it matters, and what success looks like, they achieve nearly 3× the normal growth rate. This is the cheapest and most powerful intervention available.

📅 60 minutes 👥 Whole group + grade-band trios 🎯 Deep phase: We Do → You Do → Transfer 📋 Materials: student work samples, FC data
0–8 min
Whole Group
Commitment Card Return + Reflection
Return Session 1 commitment cards. Give teachers 3 minutes to self-assess: "Which commitment did you keep? What made it easy or hard? What did students do differently?"

Brief partner share (2 min). Facilitator names 2–3 examples without calling out individuals. This activates prior knowledge and sets the tone: implementation is the point, not compliance.
8–18 min
Research Input
Surface vs. Deep — The Matching Principle
Present the Learning Cycle (Phase 1/2/3 from the Cycle tab). Key message: the most common instructional error is mismatching strategy to phase. Discovery learning at the surface phase and drill at the deep phase both underperform.

Discussion prompt: "Think of a lesson that didn't land last week. Where was the mismatch?" Give 2 minutes of quiet thinking, then partner share. Facilitator names patterns without solving — the goal is recognition, not prescription.
18–33 min
Grade-Band Trios
Student Work Sort — Where Are They?
Each trio brings 6 pieces of student work (or uses provided grade-band samples). Sort them into three piles: Surface, Deep, Transfer. The question is not quality — it's phase. A perfect surface-level response is not a deep response.

Guiding questions:
• Is the student recalling/recognizing/applying a taught procedure? → Surface
• Is the student comparing, explaining why, connecting across contexts? → Deep
• Is the student using this knowledge in a new context without prompting? → Transfer

Facilitator notes: Most K–2 work will be surface (appropriately). The concern is Grade 4–5 students whose work is still surface when the unit has been taught for 2+ weeks.
33–48 min
Partner Design
Design a Deep Learning Station A Task
Using the student work sort as the data, each pair designs a Station A task targeting the next phase of learning for their lowest group. The task must include:
• A visible learning intention (deep or transfer phase)
• A teacher think-aloud or modeling move
• A CFU (check for understanding) at the 5-minute mark
• A connection to the CKLA domain or Reveal Math concept currently being taught

Grade-band scaffolds:
K–1: Design a Station A guided phonics re-teach for students still at surface on the current Skills Strand pattern
Gr 2–3: Design a Station A text discussion task for students who can retell but can't yet compare across texts
Gr 4–5: Design a Station A task that pushes students from summarizing to analyzing author's craft
48–58 min
Whole Group
Peer Feedback on Designs — Warm/Cool Protocol
Two pairs share their Station A design (30 sec each). Group gives: one WARM (what makes this explicit) + one COOL (one thing to sharpen). Repeat for a second pair.

Facilitator focus: Listen for whether feedback is about the task design (often) vs. the pedagogical moves embedded in it (what matters). Redirect feedback toward: "Does the teacher move make the learning visible to the student?"
58–60 min
Commitment
Between-Session Commitment
Write one commitment: "I will use the Surface/Deep/Transfer framework to design one Station A task between now and Session 3. I will bring a student work sample showing where my group is and what I did next." Collect. Return at Session 3.
Reciprocal Teaching (d=0.74)
Summarize → Question → Clarify → Predict. Students take turns as "teacher." Works for CKLA read-alouds — students lead discussion phases after explicit teacher modeling.
Elaborative Interrogation (d=0.48)
"Why is this true?" rather than "What is this?" Forces students to connect new knowledge to existing schema. Use after surface acquisition is confirmed — not before.
Metacognitive Reflection (d=0.69)
Exit slips: "What was hard? What strategy did you use? What would you do differently?" 3 minutes at end of lesson. One of the most underused practices in K–5 settings.
0–12 min
Whole Group
Commitment Card Return + Student Work Share
Return Session 2 commitment cards. Each person has their student work sample. Give 5 minutes for quiet review: "What does the work tell you about where the student is? What explicit teaching move did you make in response?"

3–4 volunteers share briefly. Facilitator uses the Surface/Deep/Transfer framework to name what they're hearing. Goal: normalizing data-responsive teaching as the definition of explicit teaching.
12–25 min
Partner Protocol
Lesson Calibration — What's Explicit, What Isn't?
Facilitator presents 4 lesson vignettes (one per grade band — use the provided examples or real GES lessons with names removed). For each, partners discuss: "What's explicit? What's missing? What's the effect size of the dominant strategy being used?"

Vignette 1 (K–1): A phonics lesson where the teacher shows a word and calls on volunteers to decode it. (Missing: I Do modeling / think-aloud)
Vignette 2 (Gr 2–3): A reading lesson where students independently read and answer comprehension questions without prior discussion. (Missing: prior knowledge activation / guided practice)
Vignette 3 (Gr 4–5): A writing lesson with a clear rubric, teacher model paragraph, and guided co-construction before independent writing. (Strong explicit teaching — name the moves)
Vignette 4 (Any grade): A station where students do a vocabulary card sort independently without teacher introduction of terms. (Missing: surface-phase instruction before independent practice)
25–42 min
Individual → Small Group
Personal Action Plan — The 90-Day Commitment
Each teacher completes their action plan (use the Lesson Planning Tool tab). Three sections:

1. My highest-leverage move (pick one from Hattie): What is the single explicit teaching practice you will commit to deepening over the next 90 days? Must be specific, classroom-level, and observable.

2. My evidence plan: How will you know it's working? What student data will you collect? How often? Who will you share it with?

3. My support request: What do you need from your principal / MTSS specialist / co-teacher to implement this? Be specific.

After 15 minutes individual writing: share plans in grade-band groups (3 people per group). Each person gives one strength and one question about the others' plans.
42–55 min
Whole Group
Gallery Walk — Surfacing School-Wide Themes
Action plans are posted (anonymized by choice). Teachers do a 10-minute gallery walk with sticky notes: green dot = I'm doing this too, yellow dot = I want to learn more about this. Facilitator photographs all plans.

Debrief: What school-wide themes emerged? Are there patterns that point to a collective next step for the whole staff? This is the input for the next FC cycle focus.
55–60 min
Close
Hattie's Question — The Final Frame
Facilitator closes with: "John Hattie says the most powerful question a teacher can ask at the end of every lesson is not 'Did I teach this?' but 'Did they learn it? And how do I know?'"

Ask each person to write their answer to that question about today's PD on a sticky note. Collect. Read aloud 5–6 (anonymous). This is your formative evaluation of your own impact as the facilitator — and models exactly the mind frame you've been building toward.
🟦 Surface
Acquisition + fluency. I Do / We Do / You Do. Direct instruction dominant.
🟩 Deep
Consolidation + connection. Reciprocal teaching, elaboration, concept mapping.
🟨 Transfer
Application in new contexts. Problem-solving, metacognition, teaching others.