1. I
HOW TEACHERS PROVIDE INSTRUMENTAL SUPPORT TO ENABLE
SELF-REGULATED LEARNING
Tarun Varma
Dissertation submitted to the University of Oxford in part-fulfilment of the requirements for
the Degree of Master of Science in Child Development and Education
Trinity Term, 2015

2. II
Acknowledgements
To my grandfather for inspiring in me a spark and love for learning. Nana I miss you a lot
since you’ve been gone. I hope to live with your principles and make you very proud,
wherever you may be.
To the tiny 40 Explorers in my dusty little classroom in New Delhi who inspired me to be a
better, more reflective human being.
To the hope I have for myself as I embark on a true exploration of the journey of education.
To the many un-named giants on whose shoulders I stand so that I may reach higher. You are
my most dear strength. Thank you for living in my heart and soul wherever my body and
mind may travel.
September 2015
Oxford

3. III
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations.........................................................................................................................VI
Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................VII
Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Context and Aim ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Personal Motivation................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Structure of the Dissertation.................................................................................................... 3
Chapter 2: Literature Review............................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Self-regulation and Self-Regulated Learning............................................................................. 4
2.2 The elements of socio-cognitive learning ................................................................................. 5
2.2.1 Classroom Tasks & Self-regulation..................................................................................... 8
2. 2.2 Autonomy and the rise of inner speech ............................................................................ 9
2.3 Teacher provided instrumental support & enabling adaptive learning.................................... 10
2.4 Studies on self-regulated learning.......................................................................................... 15
2.5 Gaps in literature that this study seeks to address ................................................................. 16
Chapter 3: Methodology.................................................................................................................. 19
3.1 Background and Aim............................................................................................................. 19
3.2 Research Questions ............................................................................................................... 20
3.3 Research Design..................................................................................................................... 20
3.3.1 Case Study Design & Participant School Selection............................................................ 20
3.3.2 Data Collection: Observing instances of teacher instruction ............................................ 22
3.4 Data Collection Instruments................................................................................................... 26
3.5 Data Collection Procedure & Timetable.................................................................................. 28
3.7 Generalizability, Reliability & Validity..................................................................................... 30
3.8 Ethical Considerations............................................................................................................ 30
Chapter 4: Analysis and Results ....................................................................................................... 32
4.1 Coding Scheme ...................................................................................................................... 32
4.2 Preliminary Analysis............................................................................................................... 34
4.2 Analysis of Research Questions.............................................................................................. 35
4.2.1 RQ1: What is the instrumental support that teachers provide to students?......................... 35
4.2.2 RQ2: How do teachers plan to provide instrumental support? ............................................ 40

4. IV
4.2.3 RQ3: How does instrumental support reflect in practice?.................................................... 46
Topic........................................................................................................................................ 46
Varied academic tasks ............................................................................................................. 48
Feedback for learning and peer support................................................................................... 51
4.2.4 RQ4: What is the support teachers have to enable instrumental support in the classroom? 53
Chapter Five: Discussion.................................................................................................................. 58
5.1 Discussion.............................................................................................................................. 58
5.1.1 Consistency..................................................................................................................... 58
5.1.2 Scaffolding and the ZPD .................................................................................................. 58
5.1.3 Instrumental Support...................................................................................................... 59
5.2 Limitations and further direction ........................................................................................... 60
5.3 Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 61
References ...................................................................................................................................... 63
Appendices.................................................................................................................................. 65
Appendix A: List of codes and descriptions of how they are applied............................................. 65
Appendix B: Analysis of Teacher Interviews ................................................................................. 67
Appendix C: Fully Transcribed & Analysed Teacher Lesson........................................................... 85
Appendix D: Analysis of Classroom Lapel Microphone Recordings ............................................. 107
Appendix E: Fully Analysed HM Interview .................................................................................. 157
Appendix F: Interview Protocols ................................................................................................ 165
Appendix G: Homework Sample from Grade 1........................................................................... 170
List of Figures
Figure 1: Nested structure of ‘instrumental support’ which is the unit of analysis of this dissertation
........................................................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 2: Seeking convergence in data collection Source: (Yin, 2009) .............................................. 26
Figure 3: Typical blocks for planning a math lesson in the school. Source: Grade 1 teacher (T3) pre-
interview 2nd Jun 2015 ................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 4: Collective planning for primary school............................................................................... 44
List of Tables
Table 1: Definitions of self-regulation and self-regulated learning...................................................... 4
Table 2: The various definitions of the zone of proximal development and scaffolding ...................... 7
Table 3: Qualitative Differences Between Writing and Portfolio Activities in High- and Low-SRL
Classrooms........................................................................................................................................ 9
Table 4: Hypothetical Adaptive Responses Students May Make to Blocks in School ......................... 12

5. V
Table 5: Hypothetical Adaptive Responses Teachers May Make When Students Encounter Blocks in
School ............................................................................................................................................. 14
Table 6: Definitions of Inner Speech and Instrumental Support........................................................ 15
Table 7: Summary of RQs, data sources and instruments used......................................................... 24
Table 8: Data collection schedule at school...................................................................................... 29
Table 9: Codes used to highlight instances of instrumental support based on a review of the
literature......................................................................................................................................... 32
Table 10: Codes used to highlight instances of instrumental support using keywords mentioned in
teacher interviews........................................................................................................................... 33
Table 12: Number of instances of instrumental support per teacher per lesson............................... 34
Table 13: Number of instances of instrumental support per teacher per lesson per code ................ 35
Table 14: Instances of self-regulation measured in the language for regulation used in the school .. 37
Table 15: Sample from the school wide "Common Picture" document that details school systems and
procedures...................................................................................................................................... 55
Table 16: Indicative list of school and class procedures to ensure consistency ................................. 55
List of Pictures
Picture 1: Visual success criteria for writing in the reception classroom........................................... 38
Picture 2: Section of lesson plan. Success Criteria according to ability and with TA actions planned for
........................................................................................................................................................ 42
Picture 3: Transition times between each task section to ensure that children know what to expect42
Picture 4: Vision for Topic at Key Stage 1 ......................................................................................... 47
Picture 5: Feedback for learning in the timetable posted in the classroom....................................... 51

6. VI
List of Abbreviations
HM: Headmaster, used interchangeably with Principal through the dissertation
RQ: Research Question
SRL: Self-Regulated Learning
T1: Teacher One – reception class
T2: Teacher Two - also the primary school’s head or primary head
T3: Teacher Three – grade 1 class
TA: Teaching Assistant
ZPD: Zone of Proximal Development

7. VII
Abstract
Background and Aims: Self-regulation is a key concept in education literature. A lot of
studies have focused on intrinsic motivation (Zimmerman, 1989) for self-regulation. However,
self-regulation is also thought to be affected by the context the learner is present in.
Specifically, students learn from the influence of the adults they study from or spend time with
(Vygotsky, 1986). Adults provide ‘instrumental support’ by helping them step from what they
know to what they do not know. This process of scaffolds for support allows each student to
learn at their own pace and level of difficulty. While the features of support and environments
that help learning have been identified (Perry, 1998), a real-time description of instances of
instrumental support is missing from literature. This study aims to portray how instrumental
support occurs in real time and real context.
Samples and Methods: 1) A school that offers features of a high self-regulation was chosen.
2) An in-depth case study was conducted which included observing eight lessons by three
teachers, interviewing them before and after the observation, reviewing lesson plans, teacher
interactions and interviewing the school leadership team 3) The unit of analysis was the type
and number of instances of support generated in the classrooms
Results: The findings reveal that 1) the number of instances of support vary between teachers
and between lessons for the same teacher; 2) Teachers rely on detailed planning to create a
number of instances of support 3) Instances of support occur across the school in different
aspects and not just classroom teaching; and 4) Teachers have a lot of support from the school
leadership to create these instances of instrumental support.

8. 1
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Context and Aim
Two telling quotes capture the timelessness of the meaning of learning and education.
The first
“The test of successful education is not the amount of knowledge that pupils take
away from school, but their appetite to know and their capacity to learn.” Sir Richard
Livingstone in 1941.
And the second
“…Adaptive learning, the self-control that involves confronting and coping with
stressful learning by modifying the task and/ or the self, allows students to compensate for
many of the realities of the educational system and society…” (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988)
As can be seen the concepts of learning and self-control are not new. So is the failure
of education or the years in school to enable learning or self-regulation to learn. However,
over the last decade the ‘education reform’ movement has reached a crescendo. This ranges
from a discussions to expand children’s capacity to learn whilst in school (Claxton, 2006) to
helping children discover the ability to think for themselves, problem solve and adapt to
change (Wagner, 2012). Creating learners who can navigate the world themselves is the new
goal of education.
As a result helping children learn and self-regulation or adapting to change is a part of
every school’s rhetoric. However, a real time description of actions that truly support self-
regulation is missing. This dissertation seeks to first highlight how self-regulated learning
occurs and the process that underpin it. It then aims to undertake a real-time description in a
reform oriented school of how self-regulation is supported and created.

9. 2
1.2 Personal Motivation
Two narratives converge in informing my choice of this topic for my dissertation. One,
I came into primary school teaching after five years of working in large firms and running a
business. Through my career in business I was struck by a particular set of people. People who
seemed to be good learners, students of life, humble, mastery oriented and good at self-
discipline in varied challenging circumstances. These people seemed to be made of something
special. In my business, I worked with some of the top ranked higher educational institutions
in India. The deans and directors of these institutions often told me that the aforementioned
skills I admired were built when their students were young. I made the transition to become a
primary school teacher to know how education helps build these skills that I admired.
Two, I am a product of nine different schools. I changed schools almost every year
while growing up; thanks to my father being in a transferable job. However, I seemed to learn
just as much, if not more, outside the classroom as inside it. As I look back on my decisions,
learning and relationships; it is what I learnt from people and incidents that seems to inform
me about who I am. Even more so, the interaction I had within school is seared in my memory
as units of data on which I built my ‘conception of the world’.
As a result of these narratives I remain keen to understand how social interaction and
education creates better learners. How can teachers support students to self-regulate so that 1)
the education system can create better learners and 2) this process can be replicated at scale?
Hence, this dissertation examines self-regulation with a socio-cognitive lens and seeks to
explain how teachers help create better learners.
1.3 Research Questions

10. 3
In order to understand the real-time and real-context incidents of instrumental support
that enable self-regulation this study investigates four research questions.
1. What is the instrumental support that teachers provide to students?
2. How do teachers plan to provide instrumental support?
3. How does instrumental support reflect in practice?
4. What is the support teachers have to enable instrumental support in the classroom?
1.4 Structure of the Dissertation
Chapter 1 presents an introduction to the dissertation covering the main aim, my
motivation to pursue this topic and a rationale for this research.
Chapter 2 focuses on a review of the literature on self-regulation, the importance of
socio-historic constructivist theory on how children self-regulate. It shows how for students,
self-regulation is not only intrinsic but learnt from adults and teachers. This ability to self-
regulate arises from instances of ‘instrumental support’. The chapter concludes with how
‘instrumental support’ is the unit of analysis of this dissertation.
Chapter 3 highlights the case study approach followed to obtain empirical data for this
dissertation. It outlines the choice of the school, the research design and data collection
instruments
Chapter 4 presents an analysis of the data and the research questions
Chapter 5 summarizes the results of the dissertation, presents its limitations and
suggestions for further research

11. 4
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter of the dissertation reviews the socio-cognitive aspect of self-regulated
learning and the role teachers play in it. Section one of the chapter begins with a review of
various definitions of self-regulation and self-regulated learning. Section two addresses the
socio-cognitive model of self-regulation and its elements – the zone of proximal development
and scaffolding. Section three focuses on the role teachers who use these elements to enable
self-regulated learning. Section four, reviews studies to date that use the socio-cognitive
model to imbibe SRL. The chapter closes with section five which presents the need to
observe instances of SRL in real time. These are the instances which provide opportunities to
instil self-regulation in children. These instances called ‘instrumental support’ unit of analysis
of the dissertation.
2.1 Self-regulation and Self-Regulated Learning
Self-regulation and self-regulated learning are variously defined. It usually refers to a
learner who can adapt to the challenges of the task at hand. A student who strives to achieve
goals that involve academic risk but learns from his or her missteps. And a student who
responds flexibly and initiates a challenging task for the meta-learning within it (Rohrkemper
& Corno, 1988). A few oft mentioned definitions of self-regulation are listed below (see
Table 1).
Table 1: Definitions of self-regulation and self-regulated learning
Definition Author
Self-Regulation The intentional
and planful pursuit of goals
in a manner
that is flexible and that
promotes individual
growth and social change.
(Yowell & Smylie, 1999)
Self-Regulated Learning The degree to which
students are
metacognitively,
(B. J. Zimmerman, 1989)

12. 5
motivationally, and
behaviorally
active participants in their
own learning process.
An active, constructive
process whereby learners set
goals for their learning and
then attempt to monitor,
regulate, and control their
cognition, motivation, and
behaviour, guided and
constrained by their goals
and the contextual features
of the environment.
(Pintrich, 2000)
The key evolution in the definition of self-regulated learning is from the one in
Zimmerman’s 1989 work cited above to Pintrich’s work in 2000 is the inclusion of the
environment. It transfers the burden of self-regulation from being wholly intrinsic to a
function of the external environment or context the learner is in.
This transition from intrinsic to the external environment is not wholly new.
‘Environment’ if interpreted as the cultural knowledge, tools and skills learnt from adults
dates at least as far back as Vygotsky’s work on how children learn (Vygotsky, 1978). In his
studies on learning and self-regulation he mentions that children initially learn in
collaboration with adults. As development proceeds, children inculcate what they learn from
expert members of their environment i.e. teachers and families into their own lives (Yowell &
Smylie, 1999). This internalization of external context is referred to as the socio-cognitive
model of learning.
2.2 The elements of socio-cognitive learning
The idea that children learn from collaboration with adults forms the backbone of the
socio-cognitive theory of self-regulation and self-regulated learning. The difference in the
children’s ability to engage with a problem with the aid of an adult and their eventual
capacity to perform the task themselves is referred to as the zone of proximal development
(Vygotsky, 1978). In this zone the adult guides the child with instructions and the child

13. 6
responds with what he or she senses from the task and the. With the adult controlling the
tasks, the interaction can appear asymmetrical in favour of the adult. However, the process of
meaningful learning for both the teacher and student is one of shared responses between
student and teacher (Yowell & Smylie, 1999).
Classrooms introduce children to a number of instances of this shared interaction with
an adult. The shared, hence social, transactions in the classroom gives rise to a collective
zone of proximal development (Moll & Whitmore, 1996). This zone is shared between one
teacher (usually) and many students. Teachers navigate this zone by providing the students
disposable crutches that can be used to learn. This ‘scaffolding’ is the support provided to
enable a student to perform with support at first and gradually with independence (Wood &
Wood, 1996).
When creating a scaffold, the tutor seeks to bridge the gap between the skills the child
currently has and the demands a new task places on the child. Here the interaction between
the adult and child is key. The children build from the base of knowledge they have. In the
process stepping from certainty into uncertainty. The adult provides instructions that help the
children step up from what they know currently, to what they could learn. The range of
learning is determined by the child’s zone of proximal development. It is the process of
recruiting mental faculties to support problem solving and address the task at hand that is
learnt from the adult (Vygotsky, 1986 pp 194; Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976). The adult helps
maintain a direction of learning and navigate the steps in the task by keeping the ultimate
goal of the task in sight. They ‘guide participation’ and ensure responsibility is gradually
transferred from the teacher to the learner (Wood & Wood, 1996).
Scaffolding is not merely setting students a series of endless tasks. It involves the
teacher understanding the child, its motivation and appealing to the child’s interests
(McCaslin & Hickey, 2001a). Terms such as ‘intelligent sympathy’ (Yowell & Smylie, 1999)

14. 7
have been used to describe the shared relationship between tutor and tutee(s). What might
capture the process of learning best is perhaps this quote from McCaslin and Hickey
Scaffolding resonates a warmth and commitment. It shares features with less
formal opportunities for teaching and learning that can occur between parent and
child, coach and athlete, master and apprentice; relationships that often mellow with
time. (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001 pp 138)
This implies a close bond between the teacher and the child, a shared cultural
experience and day to day knowledge of learning. The resulting collective zone of proximal
development in the classroom is the function of the interaction of two experts. The first
expert is the teacher who set the task, task conditions and rules of interaction. The second
expert is the student who knows what to expect and how to behave in a school. Students
attempt to respond to the tasks set by the teacher. Teachers in turn work attempt to scaffold
from simpler to more difficult tasks to enable learning (Yowell & Smylie, 1999). I pause here
to recapture the key terms discussed in the process socio-cognitive learning before switching
from theory to what happens in the classroom.
Table 2: The various definitions of the zone of proximal development and scaffolding
Concept Definition Author
Zone of Proximal
Development
The zone of proximal development
highlights how guidance assists a
student to achieve a goal that is
beyond its solo effort.
The distance between the actual
developmental
level as determined by independent
problem solving and the level of
potential development
as determined through problem
solving under adult guidance or in
collaboration with more capable
peers.
(Wood et al., 1976)
(Vygotsky, 1978 p 86)
Scaffolding Scaffolding consists of an adult
“controlling” elements of the task
that are initially beyond the
(Wood et al., 1976 p 90)

15. 8
learner’s capacity, thus permitting
him to concentrate upon and
complete only those elements that
are within his range of competence.
Scaffolding resonates warmth and
commitment. It shares features with
less formal opportunities for
teaching and learning that can occur
between parent and child, coach and
athlete, master and apprentice;
relationships that often mellow with
time.
(McCaslin & Hickey,
2001a)
2.2.1 Classroom Tasks & Self-regulation
The relationship between teachers and students in the collective zone of proximal
development is underpinned by the work set for students by their teachers. There are two
elements of classroom work that need explanation. Firstly, the features of the classrooms that
enable a high degree of SRL. Secondly, the training provided by teachers to students to
respond these features. I focus on the latter for the purpose of this dissertation. However, it is
useful to briefly outline critical features of classroom tasks based on past studies of self-
regulated learning.
To leverage their relationship and collective ZPD teachers set tasks that enable
interaction and learning for each student. As a result the classroom should offer a variety of
tasks. Students are encouraged to make choices on what task they would like to do. Even
where and ideally when. They should have a choice to work with or without peers. The tasks
should be meaningful and embedded in the child’s day to day reality or ‘culture’. As a result
of these factors there is scope for interaction between the teacher and individual student,
between students and between a group of students and the teacher (Perry, 1998; Turner,
1995). A useful summary of the characteristics of tasks in a high SRL classroom are provided
below. These characteristics of high self-regulatory environments cover the task, the situation
(student control), the support provided and the features of evaluation (see Table 3. In a high

16. 9
self-regulated learning context there is varied choice, the student can control the situation,
they can access support and evaluation is embedded. These features are missing in low self-
regulated learning environments (column three of table 3). We will see now why these
features of high SRL environments are imperative.
Table 3: Qualitative Differences Between Writing and Portfolio Activities in High- and Low-SRL Classrooms
Variable High-SRL classrooms Low-SRL classrooms
Tasks Tasks were complex, focused on
large chunks of meaning, extended
over long periods of time, and
engaged students in all phases of
the writing process.
Tasks focused on specific skills
apart from composition, were short
in duration, focused on prewriting
and drafting processes, and focused
on specific strategies versus being
strategic.
Student control Students had a range of relatively
unconstrained choices and
opportunities to control challenge
and were involved in evaluation.
Students choices were limited.
Teachers controlled challenge and
set criteria for evaluation.
Support Students received instrumental
support from peers and teacher
(support that
led to self-regulation).
Students received procedural
support from peers and teachers.
Evaluation Evaluation was embedded in
ongoing activities, interactive,
emphasized processes as well as
products, focused on personal
progress, and interpreted errors as
opportunities to learn.
Evaluation was a separate activity
done by the teacher, focused on the
mechanical aspects of writing,
applied the same standards to all
students, and highlighted number
correct and student differences.
Note. SRL = self-regulated learning.
Source (Perry, 1998)
2. 2.2 Autonomy and the rise of inner speech
Assuming the existence of these enabling features, SRL is dependent on teacher
actions (Meyer & Turner, 2010; Wood & Wood, 1996). Expert teachers grant students
autonomy in the process of learning. This flexible control (Yowell & Smylie, 1999) allows
the student the chance to engage in tasks within the boundaries set by the teacher. The tasks
place demands on the student. The student absorbs these demands, the social environment
and reconstructs them internally (Vygotsky, 1986). These external structures begin to form

17. 10
structures of addressing the task within the child’s mind (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001b). This
absorption of the external environment into the mind and the internal dialogue that ensues is
termed as ‘inner speech’ (Vygotsky, 1986).
Inner speech informs the student about the task and their ability to address it. It
enables task initiation and progress towards completion. It helps make available guidelines to
address the task that are externally provided or build on what the student knows. Inner speech
performs the role of integrating the influence of the teacher and the zone of proximal
development of the child. It is the vehicle for self-regulation within the child (Rohrkemper &
Corno, 1988; Vygotsky, 1986). By providing support and modifying task or classroom
conditions teachers influence this process of learning and self-regulation. This dissertation
focuses on these instances of ‘instrumental support’ that cover tasks, support, situation and
evaluation. The following sections elaborate what the support looks like, how it works and
the contribution this dissertation can make to extant research.
2.3 Teacher provided instrumental support & enabling adaptive learning
As discussed, teachers set tasks with scaffolds within the collective zone of proximal
development of the classroom. Within this continuum each student has their own individual
zone of proximal development (see table two). In many cases, the difference between the
individual and collective ZPD implies the task is either easy or difficult for the child. This
ease or difficulty requires an adaptive response from the child (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988)
to address the task.
If easy, the student can increase the challenge for by speeding up his output for
example. If the student is bored, he or she could also perform other tasks alongside or help
another pupil for whom this task is difficult to access. In case the task is difficult the opposite
happens. The student seeks to simplify the task by re-reading the question or adhering to pre
mentioned steps. He or she could also focus exclusively on the task and seek assistance from

18. 11
a more competent peer. An adaptive response requires a calibration from the student to the
task at hand (see table four). Depending on the level of challenge (type of block) the student
can has three choices (adaptive response). They can changing the task, their reaction or the
situation.

19. 12
Table 4: Hypothetical Adaptive Responses Students May Make to Blocks in School
Adaptive Response
Type of Block Change Task Change Self Change Situation
Difficulty or unfamiliarity
(demands excessive)
Simplify the task (e.g., reread directions, relate to
something familiar, break into parts, strip of
nonessentials)
Streamline the task (e.g., use self-monitoring and
self-reinforcement to aid flow)
Prioritize the intent to learn (do away
with competing intentions)
Envision positive results (make outcomes
focal)
Gather more knowledge (about how to do
the task, practice more)
Seek assistance (e.g., from peers, teacher)
Protest and campaign against situation
(e.g., ask to do something else; remove
distraction)
Tedium or overly
supportive (demands
insufficient)
Increase challenge (e.g., speed up the pace, and
entrapments and competition)
Embellish the task (e.g., add variety, stimuli)
Simultaneously think of or do other
things (e.g., something more interesting)
Introduce competing intentions (e.g., to
challenge peers as well as to learn)
Change goal focus (e.g., fantasize about
reaching them and positive
consequences)
Remove resources and assistance (e.g.,
ask to work alone)
Teach someone else (while carrying out
the task at hand)
Introduce potential distractions (e.g.,
move to noisy area, get more students
involved)
Source – (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988)
The role of the teacher assumes significance especially when the student needs help to generate this ‘adaptive response’. Often when
confronted with a difficult task and the ensuing frustration the student’s inner speech fails to recruit the adaptive learning strategies necessary for
task completion and learning. This applies equally when a task is too easy and boredom replaces frustration (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988).
Teachers use their bond with the students to act as coaches; guiding students along their ZPD. They provide ‘instrumental support’ by giving

20. 13
instructions to help the students to operate independently. They help them make choices by showing how to make appropriate choices. And in
addition , they let their students interpret errors as opportunities to learn (Moll & Whitmore, 1996; Perry, 1998; Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988).
As a result of this ‘instrumental support’ students internalize the learning scaffolds created by the teacher and formulate their own
structures to address frustration or boredom. Instrumental support plays a role in modifying inner speech. The process of helping generate these
adaptive responses by teachers is represented in the table five below. It mirrors what an adaptive student we saw in table four. Yet the focus is on
the instrumental support that the teacher provides to enable an adaptive response in the student.

21. 14
Table 5: Hypothetical Adaptive Responses Teachers May Make When Students Encounter Blocks in School
Adaptive Response
Circumvents the Block Overcomes the block
Type of Block Change Teaching Change Task Change Situation Help Student to Make an Adaptive
Response
Difficulty or
unfamiliarity
(demands
excessive)
Give hints, cues, explanations, etc.
Provide encouragement,
reinforcement
Simplify the task (e.g., break into
parts, strip of non-essentials, relate
to something familiar)
Reassign student to a different task
Add assistance (from peers, other
adults, or other instructional
resources – computer, etc.)
Complete work for the student;
require more practice
Protest and campaign against
situation (e.g., remove distraction)
Model adaptive student responses
(changes in self, task or situation –
see table on hypothetical student
responses)
Ask students to make adaptive
responses; provide coaching
Ask students to substitute protest
for withdrawal (i.e., communicate
the need for help; campaign for
change)
Tedium or overly
supportive
(demands
insufficient)
Avoid cueing, explanations, and
feedback
Make challenging remarks,
entrapments
Add complications (e.g., speed up
pace, add competition, remove
familiar elements)
Add embellishments (e.g., variety,
stimuli)
Get peers involved (as cooperative
or competitive co-workers)
Remove other instructional
processes
Introduce potential distractions
(e.g., more procedures)
Model adaptive student responses
(changes in self, task or situation -
see table on hypothetical student
responses)
Ask students to make adaptive
responses as above; provide
coaching
Source – (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988)

22. 15
The two concepts to remember in this section are inner speech and instrumental
support which are presented below in Table 6. Inner speech guides the student’s response to a
task and hence learning. Whilst it is instrumental support that influences inner speech. As a
result instrumental support is associated with learning.
Table 6: Definitions of Inner Speech and Instrumental Support
Concept Definition Author
Inner Speech Inner speech forms the interface
between the social and instructional
environment of the classroom and
the inner world of the student. It
informs the students’ assessment of
the task and the strategies they can
mobilize to address these tasks.
Hence, it forms the basis for
connecting new thoughts and
concepts to existing body of
knowledge
(Vygotsky, 1986)
Instrumental Support Carefully orchestrate instruction to
ensure that students acquire the
domain and strategy knowledge
they need to operate independently,
help them make appropriate choices,
encourage them to expand their
developing abilities by attempting
challenging tasks, and use non-
threatening evaluation practices that
encourage students to focus on
personal progress and interpret
errors as opportunities to learn.
(Moll & Whitmore, 1996;
Perry, 1998)
2.4 Studies on self-regulated learning
Arguably the ultimate goal of teaching and instruction is to create learners who can
address challenges and learn on their own (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988). Hence, the role of
teacher actions in enabling self-regulated learning (herein after referred to as SRL) or
adaptive learning has received considerable attention.

23. 16
In her seminal doctoral work (Table 3 above), Perry distinguishes between classrooms
with high SRL and low SRL (Perry, 1998). Since her study, Perry has gone on to examine
how SRL is measured, classroom contexts that support SRL and student teacher interactions
that foster SRL (Perry & Rahim, 2011; Perry & VandeKamp, 2000; Perry et al., 2002; Winne
& Perry, 2005). Meanwhile, the definition of self-regulated learning has evolved from
Zimmerman’s focus on the individual where he states self –regulation is “the degree to which
students are metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviourally.” (B. J. Zimmerman, 1989) to
Pintrich who believes that self-regulated learning is “an active, constructive process whereby
learners set goals for their learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their
cognition, motivation, and behaviour, guided and constrained by their goals and the
contextual features of the environment” (Pintrich, 2000) (see table one).In light of the socio-
cognitive model (see table one) De Groot uses the interview and observation methodology to
highlight features of the school environment that contribute to SRL (De Groot, 2002).
However, as Rohrkemper and Corno point out (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988); how a
teacher helps generate an adaptive response is the measure of how self-regulation is
internalized. Scaffolds, inner speech and the collective ZPD are features dependent on
instrumental support by the teacher. And those instances of instructional practice or the
‘instrumental support’ that provides the opportunity for self-regulation are the subject of this
dissertation.
2.5 Gaps in literature that this study seeks to address
From the socio-historic and constructivist perspective one of the contexts is that of
interaction between students and the teacher. This interaction creates overlaps between self-
regulation, the zone of proximal development and scaffolding (Meyer & Turner, 2010).
These overlaps gives rise to the relationships between the individuals (teachers and students),
objects and the setting (classroom and school). This dissertation seeks to understand how
self-regulatory processes develop within the student-teacher overlap or interaction. It focuses

24. 17
on teacher instructional practices or ‘instrumental support’ that provides opportunities for
self-regulation in a classroom. Such descriptions of real time and real-context instances are
rare in self-regulated learning research (Perry et al., 2002). The dissertation also seems to
recognize and point out the support structures that exist to enable SRL in a classroom. Most
self-regulation studies to date have focused on how individual self-regulatory processes differ
(Meyer & Turner, 2010). The researcher seeks to focus on events in a real-time and authentic
context to make inferences about teacher actions that support self-regulation.
Perry (Perry, 1998) focuses on elements of planning such as tasks, student control,
support and evaluation in a classroom. Rohrkemper and Corno set out ideas on how teacher’s
responses may be classified as ‘enabling’ adaptive responses when they work with children.
Amalgamating the two research themes I look for instances of instrumental support in high
SRL environments.
Working within Perry’s structure of task, situation, support and evaluation - what are
the teacher actions that enable self-regulation? How does the teacher help the student break
up tasks? How do teachers reassign students to tasks or add complexity in responding to the
student who is clearly finding the set task easy? I look at how students receive instrumental
support. Is it in the form of support in a group or a peer? When does the teacher step-in? How
does the teacher help the student refocus or when is it appropriate to request for help. I
examine what the teacher does to enable student support or how the student can internalize
what to do when perplexed or finished. This study aims to capture teacher actions in real
context and real time (Perry et al., 2002). This is summarized in the table below (see Table
7).
Table 7: Instances of instrumental support observed in this research study
Self-regulated learning / instrumental
support
No self-regulated learning / non
instrumental support
A Task - complex and meaningful tasks
where teachers
E. Gives hints clues or explanations

25. 18
1. Show how to break up task into
chunks or address task step by
step
F. Provides encouragement / re-
enforcement
2. Reassign student to a new task if
they are struggling
G. Makes challenging remarks
3. Add complexity if the task is too
easy
H. Provides entrapments
4. Add variety
B Support
1. Adds / removes group or peer
support as appropriate
2. Adds / removes other resources –
computer / learning aids
3. Encourages requesting for help
4. Helps understand how to refocus
C Situation
1. Models changing the situation –
seeking support
2. Models what to do when
perplexed
3. Models helping others if finished
D Evaluation mechanism
1. Evaluation embedded in the task
2. Evaluation emphasizes the
process as well as the product /
outcome
3. Focuses on personal / group
progress
Indeed, this work uses the tools – interview protocols, observations forms built via the
extant studies but seeks to find that in an ideal case environment – what does a teacher do and
how he or she plans to ensure the children are consistently learning at the edge of their ZPD.

26. 19
Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapter reiterates aims and outlines in the detail the research questions this
dissertation seeks to answer. The chapter then focuses on the school chosen to examine these
questions and obtain data. The purposeful choice of the school is supported by the research
design, data collection instruments and data collection procedures described. The section
concludes with a note about the validity and reliability of the work as well as ethical
considerations planned for and encountered.
3.1 Background and Aim
This dissertation is based on a socio-historic and constructivist perspective of
learning. This implies that self-regulation in children develops through their social
interaction. It is this interaction that is the primary unit of analysis through Vygotsky’s work
(McCaslin & Hickey, 2001a).
Within this shared learning and interaction there emerge three options as plausible
units of analysis. Firstly, the relationship between children, their school and classrooms.
Second, the student’s conception of the multiple worlds they are a part of and how they
internalize the influences from them to learn. Thirdly, how teachers provide instrumental
support to create opportunities that enable SRL (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001a).
Teacher actions and instrumental teacher interventions that that trigger SRL are not as
well documented (Perry & Rahim, 2011). Typically a student can be trained in a structured
intervention to enhance adaptive learning or self-regulation. However, students usually fail to
use these strategies spontaneously in non-experimental settings (Zimmerman, 2008).
Documenting teacher actions that enable self-regulation can help teachers focus their effort in
a direction that enable creation of better learners. The analysis of classroom social talk or
classroom discourse is a powerful lens to analyse how self-regulation is transferred from the
teacher to the learner (Meyer & Turner, 2010). I focus on the third unit of analysis, the

27. 20
classroom discourse and the teacher support which leads me to ask and answer the following
research questions. These insights offer some clues to how we can create better educational
systems for our world.
3.2 Research Questions
This study investigates four research questions.
1. What is the instrumental support that teachers provide to students?
2. How do teachers plan to provide instrumental support?
3. How does instrumental support reflect in practice?
4. What is the support teachers have to enable instrumental support in the classroom?
The first question seeks to establish how instances of self-regulation are created by teacher
instruction in the classroom. The second and the third seeks to establish how instrumental
support can be planned for and how it emerges in context. The final question addresses the
support the teachers need to enable self-regulated learning by continuing to ensure instances of
instrumental support.
3.3 Research Design
This section highlights the choice of research design, the source of empirical data, the
instruments used and data collection procedures.
3.3.1 Case Study Design & Participant School Selection
To study instances of instrumental teacher support I needed to work within a context
that offered the features of a high SRL environment (see table three). I chose the case method
to immerse myself in a high SRL environment and collect data on instrumental support.
Predictive validity was not the goal of my study (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001a). As a researcher
embedded in an environment my aim was to see if high SRL environments result in instances

28. 21
of instrumental support. Hence, I chose my independent variables (teachers to follow, sources
of data, data collection instruments etc) based on their ability to inform me about instances of
instrumental support.
Before selecting a school for my study I needed to articulate and test my explicit and
implicit assumptions (McCaslin & Hickey, 2001a). The explicit assumptions (variety of
tasks, need for student choice, options for student control) were informed by my reading and
literature reviewed. The implicit assumption was that in a school engaged in change the
leadership needed to be open to an immersive researcher in their midst.
Since moving to the United Kingdom in September 2014, I visited five state funded
schools or academies, a private school in greater London and a learning centre open to all
primary school students in the Oxford area. I also interacted with heads of schools and
researchers at two major conferences in London and during a competition where solutions to
education and better schools were considered.
Based on these visits, conversations and literature I chose two schools purposefully
(Denzin & Lincoln, 2011; Yin, 2009) on the basis of strong school leader vision, evidence of
school wide systems and planning for teacher action and a high focus on teacher interaction
with the students in the primary school classrooms. I visited these schools twice in the month
of February and March 2015. Along with a group of teachers, I spent time in the nursery,
reception, grade 1 classrooms as an anonymous visitor. I also spent time in the common areas
observing routines, meal times and transitions. I was struck by how the school was different
in its teacher- pupil interactions, coordination between staff and deep relationships between
the respective school heads.

29. 22
One school had an outstanding Ofsted rating. The other had not yet been rated since it
was less than two years in operation.1
Both schools were based in a low income community
with high parent and teacher interaction. They were willing for researchers to interact with
students. The last two factors indicated they were ideal for investigating the potential of SRL
(De Groot, 2002)
I informed and contacted both schools with the intent to conduct research and
obtained an approval to work with them. However, within a week of beginning my research
with school one it was clear that in order to understand instances of instances of instrumental
support I needed to review their systems and archived vision documents, shadow their
primary school head and attend teacher management meetings. I would not have had this
access in the second school. At the same time as an intrinsic case study (Becker, 1998;
Silverman, 2010) this approach allowed me to study the different facets of the school I was
in.
3.3.2 Data Collection: Observing instances of teacher instruction
The data of existing studies on classroom SRL came from a combination of classroom
observations, and pre- and post-lesson interviews of teachers (Meyer & Turner, 2010; Perry &
VandeKamp, 2000; Perry et al., 2002; Perry, 1998; Turner, 1995). However, student teacher
interactions are nested within the classroom (Yowell & Smylie, 1999). The nested structure is
reflected in the figure below (see figure one). As the figure indicates, students and teachers are
nested within the classroom and school. The unit of analysis ‘instances of instrumental support’
are also nested within this structure. They are informed by the vision of the school leadership
and school and classroom procedures.
1
However, in this second school, a colleague trained on the CLASS (Classroom Assessment Scoring System)
rated the school high on instructional and emotional support from teachers.

30. 23
Figure 1: Nested structure of ‘instrumental support’ which is the unit of analysis of this dissertation
The nested structure created two challenges. One, that the units of analysis were
embedded and two, in order to answer the research questions competently data needed to be
triangulated (Silverman, 2010; Yin, 2009) from multiple sources despite classroom discussions
being the main source of primary data. The possible sources of data collection for a case study
were documentations, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observation
and examining physical artefacts (Yin, 2009). The aim of the study, to observe teacher created
instances of self-regulation rules out participant observation.

31. 24
Direct observation was used to observe teacher instruction and teacher created lesson plans were used to review documentation for in-class
instruction. I examined archival records of institution wide plans for systems, classroom planning and daily routines in the school. Semi-structured
pre and post interviews were organized with the teachers observed. The primary head, an assistant teacher and the principal / HM were also
interviewed. In addition, while recording her student interaction I shadowed the primary head on one of her weekly drop-in’s around the grades I
was observing. I reviewed the physical artefacts and student work in the classroom and the school. The table below summarizes the data sources
and instruments used as well as how they align to the research question in consideration.
Table 7: Summary of RQs, data sources and instruments used
Research Question Data Source Instruments Used
What is the instrumental support that
teachers provide to enable self-
regulation?
- Direct observation - Observation protocol
- Lapel microphone recorder
How do teachers enable adaptive
learning in the classroom?
- Direct Observation
o Daily stand-up morning meeting?
- Documentation
o Lesson plans (documentation)
o Half term plans
o Activity and field trip plans
o Holiday homework sheets and requests to parents
- Field notes
-
What are the actions teachers take to
plan for adaptive learning in the
classroom?
- Direct Observation
o Line management meeting
o All staff review meeting
- Field notes and access to line
management documents
What are the support structures teachers
have to enable adaptive learning in the
classroom?
- Archival Records
o Primary school vision document (called ‘common
picture’)
- Field notes
- Interview protocols
- Handheld tablet camera

32. 25
o Student work archives
- Interviews
o Pre & post – teachers observed
o HM
o Primary Head
o Assistant Teacher
- Physical Artefacts
o Visual cues on routines, trackers and behaviour

33. 26
The objective of the multiple sources of evidence was to seek convergence in the data
(Yin, 2009) and find consistency in the methods across the school. This was done keeping in
mind the short duration of observations that the researcher had. As seen from figure two
below, multiple sources of data were used to inform the researcher on how frequently the unit
of analysis (instrumental support) could be found. Consistency between observations,
archives, documents and interviews indicated a practice that is regularly found in the school.
Figure 2: Seeking convergence in data collection Source: (Yin, 2009)
3.4 Data Collection Instruments
This dissertation used three instruments to collect data: (1) an observation form to
record instances of self-regulation in the classroom, (2) a lapel microphone to record the
teacher’s discourse and (3) interview protocols for interviews. We discuss them each in turn.
Observation Forms: the observations of lessons are meant to observe instructional
practices that provide the opportunity for SRL. Perry describes in detail what to expect in
high SRL classroom (Perry, 1998; pp 728,729) (also see table three). This consists of varied
tasks which are complex and meaningful, instrumental support from teachers, opportunity for
Findings
Documents
Interviews
Direct
Observations
Archival
Records
Artefacts

34. 27
students to manage the situation by controlling levels of difficulty and non-threatening
evaluation are embedded in the activity (Appendix B).
Rohrkemper & Corno describe in detail how teachers enable an adaptive response
when students encounter blocks in school. These involve how teachers change the task or
situation to ensure that the student is working within his or her zone of proximal
development. This includes appropriate scaffolding, adding peer or group support, adding a
time constraint, adding instructional resources in case needed or removing them to enable
independent work (Rohrkemper & Corno, 1988 pp 308).
Instances of teacher created opportunities for SRL arise when within task, support,
situation and evaluation the teacher changes the situation as described by Rohrkemper &
Crono. A summary of these teacher actions is presented below.
Self-regulated learning / instrumental support
A Task - complex and meaningful tasks where teachers
1. Show how to break up task into chunks or address task step by step
2. Reassign student to a new task if they are struggling
3. Add complexity if the task is too easy
4. Add variety
B Support
1. Adds / removes group or peer support as appropriate
2. Adds / removes other resources – computer / learning aids
3. Encourages requesting for help
4. Helps understand how to refocus
C Situation
1. Models changing the situation – seeking support
2. Models what to do when perplexed
3. Models helping others if finished
D Evaluation mechanism
1. Evaluation embedded in the task
2. Evaluation emphasizes the process as well as the product / outcome
3. Focuses on personal / group progress

35. 28
The observation forms (Appendix B) provided the researcher the ability to record the
number and point of these instances in the classroom and make field notes to match with the
lapel microphone recording of the teacher’s classroom discourse.
Lapel Microphone: the researcher used a simple lapel microphone to record the
teacher’s discourse and interaction with the students.
Interview protocols: The interview protocols were designed based on extant work that
has studied SRL in classrooms. A combination of pre and post interviews were used to
understand planning for instances of self-regulation and verify classroom actions (De Groot,
2002). The protocol was designed to cover how tasks are created to facilitate choice, group and
peer work and differentiated according to individual ZPD. They also considered how teachers
offered the opportunity to control the level of the challenge as well as evaluate their output
(Perry et al., 2002).
3.5 Data Collection Procedure & Timetable
Prior to entering the school, the head teacher was contacted with a request for
observations in a reception and grade one classroom. Four classroom observations for each
class were scheduled. This was done in such a manner that two lessons in each subject – literacy
and math could be observed. As befitted an exploratory case study access to more sessions was
available dependant on research progress. In addition, an interview schedule with the teachers
as well as the head teacher and primary head was organized. The table (eight) below shows all
the pre-arranged observations and interviews in bold.

36. 29
Table 8: Data collection schedule at school
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri
Week1
School holiday - T1 Pre interview
- T3 pre interview
- T1 Language
reception -
Observation
- T1 Math reception -
Observation
- Planning + Line
Management
meeting with
primary head and
T1
- T3 Math Grade 1 -
Observation
- T3 Math Grade 1 -
Observation
- Post interviews for
both T1 and T3
Week2
- T2 language
reception -
Observation
T2 Math – Reception –
Observation
- T2 post interview
- T2 / Primary head
drop in during early
years
Week3
- T3 Language grade
1 – Observation
- TOPIC observation
grade 2
- All hands meeting
- T3 Language grade
1 – Observation
- TOPIC observation
reception
- Head-teacher
interview
Week4
- T3 Language grade
1
- Grade 1 support
teacher interview
- Grade 1 planning
and evidence
- Primary head-
teacher interview
-

37. 30
As indicated in the choice of case, after entering the school and meeting with the
primary ahead a few additional sources of data selection were incorporated into the plan.
These included sources that had been planned for and needed scheduling – for example
lesson plans, school vision and procedures. Also procedural observations such as line
management meetings, the primary head drop in and observing the primary head teacher were
added.
3.7 Generalizability, Reliability & Validity
The purposive sample (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011) and an intrinsic case (Silverman,
2010) mean that dissertation is not designed to be generalized beyond the case itself. However,
the criteria used to select the case (see section 3.1.3) mean that the unit of analysis can be found
in similar cases (Silverman, 2010). As a typical case the study is designed to raise rich data
about the case (Flyvbjerg, 2006)
To ensure reliability rival explanations on SRL and self-regulation were considered as
a part of the literature review. Existing published protocols (from Perry, 1998; Rohrkemper &
Corno, 1988) were utilized for the qualitative study to ensure a degree of internal validity (Yin,
2009). The study rigorously used multiple sources of data (see figure two) to ensure
convergence of data and subsequently reported analyses.
3.8 Ethical Considerations
The study was reviewed by, and received ethics clearance through, the University of
Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee. The researcher also obtained Criminal
Record Bureau (CRB) clearance which was presented to the school before commencing the
study.
The researcher followed the ‘Protocol for research on teachers and teaching in
educational settings for typically developing students’ (Protocol Number:
SSD/IDREC/2009/P15.1) and, in line with this protocol, adhered to the British Educational
Research Association (BERA, 2011) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. Information

38. 31
letters and consent forms. Informed consent was obtained from the participating school that
covered the head teacher, primary head teacher and participating teachers. Parents and
guardians were asked to give opt-out consent. Opt-out consent was followed because the
research process entailed observing teachers without disrupting any classroom procedures or
learning. Participation in the study had the right to withdraw from the study at any stage by
informing the school.
There was no perceived harm, risk, or possible injury anticipated from this proposed
study. Secure data handling and storage. All data collected for this research is securely stored
in a locked filing cabinet, and is/will be only available to my supervisor and myself. No
reference to individuals is made within this study, and thus anonymity is upheld. Teachers were
informed that the data collection was not intended as a specific evaluation of the individual
child, and thus information concerning any of the children’s answers would not be shared.
However, they were told that the participating school would be given a brief report of the
overall.
While in the school the researcher had to consciously avoid interacting with students
during extended classroom observations. This is contrary to the participatory and helpful school
culture that all CRB cleared visitors and trainee teachers share their day with the children. In
addition, the researcher is a former teacher who is a product of similar method of training of
teachers it was hard to avoid biases in judging planning and teaching. The researcher had to
focus on aspects only on self-regulation and learning and not get distracted by efficiency of
school systems or the lack of them.

39. 32
Chapter 4: Analysis and Results
This chapter outlines how the analysis was carried out and the results of the same. The
first section covers the coding used to analyse data from interviews and observation
transcripts. The second section outlines preliminary analysis. The third section covers results
in response to each research question.
4.1 Coding Scheme
The classroom transcripts and teacher interviews were coded for instances of
instrumental support mentioned in the literature review (see table seven). Table nine below
mentions the code used for instrumental support and what i means.
Table 9: Codes used to highlight instances of instrumental support based on a review of the literature
Code Description
TASK# e.g. TASK1 Anything to do with task description such as complex meaningful tasks,
showing how to chunk tasks to make it more accessible to students, adding
or removing task complexity
SUP# How a teacher provides instrumental support by adding or removing group
support, adding or removing resources, encouraging requests for help or
helping re-focus
SIT# Scenarios where teachers model changing the situation or what to do when
perplexed and what to do when done with the task at hand
EVAL# Time points where there come up example of evaluation embedded in the
task or emphasis is on the process as well as the product or focus on
personal as well as group progress
VIS# Factors where school vision adds to self-regulatory environment
PLAN# Factors where planning assists in creating a self-regulatory environment or
task with adaptive learning opportunities
SYS# Systems that add to the self-regulatory environment
NONSRL# Instances where non self-regulatory behaviour is modelled by the teacher.
Including but not limited to providing encouragement, entrapments or
giving hints or clues
The teacher interviews contained phrases used by teachers to refer to their practices in
the classroom (herein after referred to as teacher keywords) that were repeated in all
interviews. Table 10 below mentions the keywords used by the teachers and the descriptions
of what they mean

40. 33
Table 10: Codes used to highlight instances of instrumental support using keywords mentioned in teacher interviews
Teacher used
keyword
Description
Varied Tasks Planning for mixed ability / Challenge & Extension tasks in the same
classroom setting
Marketing Introduction to new group tasks / independent tasks at the beginning of the
week so that children know what to do
Peer work, Group
work
Time during a classroom used to help students understand the concept
Timing Speeding up the situation or adding a timeline to help students plan
backwards for output
One to One
interaction
Interaction with the students / stop and talk to the students to help them
progress on / explain a task
Visual Success
Criteria
Trackers and visual signs for students to be able to remind themselves of
steps in their work, check final output for correctness and know how work is
assessed
Mini plenaries Stopping class when work is in progress and highlight positive progress,
reminding them of expectations or clearing a misunderstanding
Re-inforce systems To get the classroom back in order in case students deviate from expected
behaviour or progress on tasks
Consistency Ensuring rules, expectations, praise for good work etc are similar, consistent
and expectations met every time
Planning Planning by the teachers to ensure there is enough choice within the tasks in
the classroom so that children have to make a choice for themselves on
tasks to be done
Modelling Displaying and enacting ideal responses to a situation, task, problem or
event by the teacher for the student to imbibe
Positive Framing Ensuring good work or actions are noticed, spoken about to encourage
repetition by the student and other peers
100% participation Encouraging 100% participation by making sure the class participates as a
whole. Even if this means pausing and repeating a classroom cheer, action
or learning task
These teacher keywords mapped to the descriptions of instances of instrumental
support in the literature. For example the coded instance of instrumental support for TASK#
is associated with ‘modelling’ as in the example below from T1’s language lesson.
TASK 2 {Modelling} [11:22] when a student raises his hand to answer a question
the teacher quickly models speaking in a sentence providing the stem. Teacher: What
is Christina driving? Yes Child1. “Christina is__” [T1 Language, Appendix D]

41. 34
All instances of instrumental support in the classroom transcripts were also coded for
teacher keywords. These coded interactions and instances are recorded in Appendix D. The
coding scheme enables further analysis below.
.
4.2 Preliminary Analysis
A preliminary analysis of the teacher observations reveals high variation in number of
instances of self-regulation. As can be seen from table 12 below, this applies to lessons taught
by different teachers and lessons taught by the same teacher. For example, teacher 1 (T1) has
24 instances of self-regulation in her language lesson but only nine in maths. Teacher 3 has
consistently high instances (20 and 24 respectively) in her two language lessons. However,
the mathematics lessons her instances vary from 14 to five.
Table 11: Number of instances of instrumental support per teacher per lesson
Teacher Language Math
T1 24 9
T2 20 18
T3 20,24 14, 5
When these instances are further examined according to the coding scheme applied to
all transcripts they are distributed (see table 13). For example the 24 instances of T1’s
instrumental support in her language lesson are spread across TASK (5), SUP (7), SIT (5),
EVAL (6).

42. 35
Table 12: Number of instances of instrumental support per teacher per lesson per code
T1 T2 T3
Math Lang Math Lang Math1 Lang1 Math2* Lang2
TASK# 5 7 3 2 2 1 5
SUP# 2 7 4 6 8 7 2 6
SIT# 3 5 3 3 0 3 2 3
EVAL# 3 6 4 5 4 7 10
VIS#
PLAN#
SYS# 1 1 3 1
Total 9 24 18 20 14 20 5 24
* Represents a revision lesson
There are however some interesting observations from field notes and teacher
interviews that merit a mention alongside this data. One, the low number of instances for
T3’s math lesson (5 in total, Tables 12 and 13) arose because this was a revision lesson with
less variation in tasks. Two, T2 is the primary head and has been teaching for nine years. She
has relatively consistent distribution of support across the lessons (Table 13). She uses the
school wide procedures for instrumental support (see section 4.2.4) consistently. An analysis
of the research questions serves to add detail to this observation.
4.2 Analysis of Research Questions
4.2.1 RQ1: What is the instrumental support that teachers provide to students?
Apart from quantifying the number of instances as mentioned in the preliminary
analysis, it is important to understand the structure of the support the teachers provided
students. For example, the teacher takes the opportunity to change the situation to make
learning more accessible by modelling or encouraging choice. In the language lesson in
reception T1 is helping students recognize large words they do not have to read if they are
also high frequency words. So she says

43. 36
“I am going to read using my strategies. Oh! I know this word It’s my name, I have seen
this word a million times cause it is my name. We can all remember this word. Let’s write
it on the board. We are going to see it a few times in the book” [13:53, T1 Language,
Appendix D]
In the example above the teacher is modelling a reading practice by providing using a
situation that recurs. Here ‘modelling’ is a teacher used keyword and ‘changing the situation’
is an observed instance of instrumental support. This stems from the coding of the teacher
transcripts as explained earlier. To understand how support is provided; instances of observed
instrumental support were aggregated (columns in table 14 below). These instances were
mapped to teacher used keywords (rows in table 14 below). The trends that can be seen from
the table are highlighted according to the codes for task, support, situation and evaluation.
Tasks: Of the 25 instances (see table 14) where the teachers could help the students with a
task they most often turned to providing regulation of time spent on a task. A clear example
of regulation of time is when in his interview the assistant teacher’s interview said:
“I think giving them timing is important... visual success criteria they can refer to,
effective mini plenaries and setting time targets are useful to help regulate children.
Stopping them every five minutes or so, have you done this? Have you got capitals
and full stops… blah. blah. blah… giving them effective individual targets.. just
constantly stopping them to check. also having lessons which are varied and not
having them sit on the carpet for half an hour… in some cases if I feel they need it,
get them to sing a song in the middle of the lesson, just to reenergize them”
[Assistant teacher, 22nd Jun, 09:39]
Support: In most scenarios the teacher encourages children finding their own support by
letting them know they can access peer or TA support as needed. An oft occurring scenario is
such as the one below:

44. 37
“Ok, I need a talk- partner to come and help me read this page. You have exactly the
same book as me. To the student partner – would you like to be the pointer or would you
like to be the reader?” (T1, Reception, 3rd
June 2015, Language)
Modelling support is observed 9 times. Teacher interviews revealed why consistently
modelling a solution is thought of an important way to provide a solution.
On why consistency is important
I think some of these students live outside the school in environments where there isn’t
that kind of consistency. And they want to be somewhere safe where they do have that
kind of consistency. Even if... when I first came here I thought we were rigid and strict
and you’re spoon-feeding the children but actually modelling some things is really
important because they do not have the modelling at home which I had. [Assistant
teacher, 22nd
Jun, 05:05]
Table 13: Instances of self-regulation measured in the language for regulation used in the school
Teacher defined
instrumental support
Observed instances of instrumental support
TASK# SUP# SIT# EVAL# VIS# PLAN# SYS# Total
Research Question 1
Visual Success Criteria 3 3 1 3 10
One to One interaction 3 3 2 3 11
Timing / Timed Targets 4 3 1 1 9
Modelling 4 9 11 10 34
Positive Framing 1 1
100% participation 4 2 6
Mini plenaries 3 15 18
Encourage Choice 4 3 7
Re-inforce systems 6 2 6 14
Research Question 2
Consistency 0
Marketing 2 2
Peer, Group work 1 11 2 4 18
Varied Tasks 4 4
Total 25 42 22 39 0 0 6 134

45. 38
Situation: The other ways of changing the situation are specific to the problem at hand.
This occurs because all independent tasks are at the “level of the students” (T1preint10f2, 2nd
Jun, 03:59, Appendix B). Hence, these instances of support do not fit one teacher keyword
and are fairly equally distributed across one to one interventions, making a choice or pointing
our visual success criteria to a child. Perhaps the wisest modelling that encourages the child
to change their imagination occurred in a grade1 language lesson. Excerpt below:
“but if they got eaten your story would end straight away, would it not?” when a
student mentions they will like the family to be eaten on a visit, the teacher responds
using classroom humour by pointing out that the narrative will end right there. Hence,
modelling the need to think intelligently while not reprimanding humour.
Finally, whilst in the classroom, the teachers rely often on visual success criteria (10
instances, Table1) to ensure that children can self-regulate
to know how to stay on task.
“.. if you see along my board there are pictures
there or around the room… to remind them of what
they need or steps.. to use. We also have actions for
finger spaces… capital letters etc. we also have a target
in their books.. the target is not written it is a picture…
it might be a picture of a robot which means they need
to robot their word and use their sounds..” [T1 pre-
int1of2, 2nd
Jun, 08:06]
Evaluation: The maximum instances of evaluation occurred in a class wide mini plenary
(18) or by the teacher modelling the task (10). The teacher makes the solution public and
available to the whole class or by modelling what the task demands. An example of these
instances is when the teacher works with the TA to model how a math problem is solved.
Picture 1: Visual success criteria for writing in
the reception classroom

46. 39
This occurs in T3’s math lessons (T3, Grade1, Math, 4th
Jun). Similarly, after the teacher has
finished working with a pair of students during the taught task she explain during a plenary
how she worked with them to buy the same trumpet using a different variety of coins (T3,
Grade1, Math, 4th
Jun).
This data and information from observations leads us to three important results. Firstly, a
decrease in the variety of tasks is directly related to the increase in control from the teacher and
a reduction in the number of instances of self-regulated learning. This is seen in activities where
the task has interesting components such as play dough and colours yet it fails to scaffold the
concept to extend it beyond the basic task.
For example, in T2’s math lesson on subtraction involved making sense of a math equation,
crafting play dough balls and taking away the required number of playdough balls to represent
subtraction. Despite the teacher coming back and spending five minutes with the child
explaining the logic of the play dough activity and modelling the equation “7-6=1” or “seven
take away 6 is equal to 1”the child was not interested in the smashing, counting the number of
balls, making them or understanding this take away task. At one point when the teacher says –
this is what you have to do, the student even says “why?” It takes continuous encouragement
and asking “how many are not smashed” five times for the child to focus and work with the
teacher.
Two, adult supervision to monitor scaffolding and the task is needed. The days in T1’s class
where the instance of SRL are high are also days with additional adults or fewer children
present in the classroom. What the adult does is significantly important too. A stand in teacher
who was supporting the teacher helped ask the right questions. Example: “what is the math
equation you have there?” do you have to subtract? Ok? What are you trying to do? You need
to make 18 balls with play dough? Let me see, can I help you make some? Right, where are

47. 40
you stuck? Good job” the above is a different scenario from teaching assistants who are stuck
managing behaviour or providing attention management alone.
Three, T3 has a consistently higher record of self-regulatory instances except one Math
lesson where she is unwell and is revising a lesson. Perhaps, her experience of teaching helps
her scaffold tasks better or change situations. For example, during a classroom activity
involving peer discussion and role play she noticed that the discussion was basically evolving
into smaller groups chatting to each other. She got the teams role playing eight minutes earlier.
The session was more productive with the time saved spent on mini-plenaries and feedback.
However, teacher expertise is not always related to high SRL as seen in the case of the primary
head,
4.2.2 RQ2: How do teachers plan to provide instrumental support?
As a part of the research I was also curious about how instances of instrumental support
arise consistently. Teacher interviews and a review of their planning documents revealed
features that enable these instances to arise. The planning entails varied tasks – in the
classroom, for homework and to master a concept. The detailed planning also enables how the
teachers manage pairing students according to ability or how much they can be pushed into
their zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978). We look at each of these in turn.
Planning structures within a lesson
Across primary school an experienced teacher has the responsibility to plan lesson in
a subject. Presented here is a sample of a plan for Maths lesson. Each lesson is planned step
by step in blocks with transitions. The figure below represents the different types instruction
and the times associated with them.

48. 41
Figure 3: Typical blocks for planning a math lesson in the school. Source: Grade 1 teacher (T3) pre-interview 2nd Jun 2015
These planning blocks above provide instances around which all teacher can plan to
ensure adaptive learning. The class is divided into ability groups. Each group has a success
criteria. The teacher can plan for how the TA will support each group. All transitions between
group or independent tasks ensure the students know what to expect. An example of this is
shown in the pictures that follow (see pictures 2 and 3).
Do Now
•5 min
•Pupils works alone
New Learning
•15 min
•Teacher teaches
whole class
Talk Task
•5-7 min
•In pairs / groups
dep on unit of task
Developed Learning
•10 min
•Teacher teaches
whole class
•Misconception /
extension / re-
inforce skill
Independent
Learning
•10 – 15 min
•Student has self-
evaluate options
•Student can access
a challenge

49. 42
Picture 2: Section of lesson plan. Success Criteria according to ability and with TA actions planned for
Picture 3: Transition times between each task section to ensure that children know what to expect

50. 43
The underlying planning enables the execution of varied tasks by the children in the
classroom. How this happens was described by a teacher during an interview
On consistently pushing ahead for learning
...using the process of I. we and you. Especially in a lesson which can be more easily
structured like Maths. Then also in literacy, showing them clear modelling on the carpet
and then perhaps “they practice on the mini white board and then go onto the table do it
independently. One thing that has worked very well this year is putting children on mixed
ability tables… because in a single ability table… the children would look around and be
like it is ok to write just five words, or not on the line or with well-formed handwriting…
we noticed that moving children to a table where others were not so far above them to be
intimidating but just.. just above them.. so they could see oh actually this is what other
children are doing. This is what I can achieve and being inspired by that. Also their
behaviour as well… [Assistant teacher, 22nd
Jun, 07:29
Collective Planning as a School team
Collective planning, ensuring feedback in the learning with children and planning for
differentiated learning ensures instrumental support. We look at some examples of collective
planning and feedback structures for teachers and students.
The team of teachers for each grade shares plans as shown in the figure 4 below. Each
teacher is responsible for planning a subject area. These plans are synchronized across the
team of teachers and TAs teaching a class via a weekly all hands meeting. Each grade,
consisting of two classrooms of 30 pupils each, has two teachers, two assistant teachers or
teachers-in-training and two assistants.

51. 44
Figure 4: Collective planning for primary school
Planned Feedback for teachers
Each teacher for the grade, i.e. the two teachers leading the classrooms, meet the
primary head once a week for a 90 minute discussion. This is where teachers have the
opportunity for feedback to know how instances of instrumental support can be increased.
For example the primary head notes in one lesson for literacy:
“Great planning section of the lesson – the children all knew what they could
do and what they wanted to do. They made a choice before leaving the carpet to work
independently, some explained their choice.” [Teacher line management meeting
output between reception teacher & primary-head]
This feedback is given with follow up points to improve opportunities for instances of
instrumental support. Examples include:
One, “We need to think next week about how detailed their planning is – what and
where are solid, who and how need work.” And two, “What happens after the plan is
made? Actions step: To be more public about what happens after the plan – follow it
Weekly all-hands meeting
All staff responsiblefor that grade meet
Align plans across Math, Literacy, Topic, Field Visits
All teachers and TA know actions, objectives and key success criterai
Weekly line-management slots
Each teacher meets grade head / primary head
Discusses area of focus, issues, receives feedbackfrom head’s walk around
Daily 5 min primary get-together
The whole staff meets every morning to flag any issues for the day
Helpful when school wide focus is in progress (e.g. value of the week)

52. 45
up and publically value this. Scrap books will help.” [Teacher line management
meeting output between reception teacher & primary-head]
Planned discussions amongst teachers
The team of teachers in the school discuss student progress regularly. The whole
primary staff team across six classrooms and nursery gets together every morning for five to
ten minutes to discuss any actions for the day, issues and resolution. For example, during the
time the researcher was present deciding how to respond to chicken-pox quarantines so as not
to lose term time and how to ensure more at-home reading to make up for lost classroom
instruction.
Enabling instances of instrumental support is a matter of discussion and action
throughout the school team. The school leadership brought up meta-learning herself without
prompting. I stopped to request an example of what she meant by it and she replied.
“the team in that group is just coming to terms with the early years task demands. But
the higher ability learners are getting to the point where they can coach their peers..
so for example you saw the girl work with her peer to help her with diagraph drop to
get her to the answer without giving her the answer. Umm and you might have seen it
with the little boy about what is going to happen next. Last year, with experienced
teachers we were able to get them to recognize their own learning almost a term
ahead.” [Primary head, 10th
Jun, 10:19]
A follow-up question was on the steps to get to this stage. I received the following
answer
“…A solid induction helps, a constant environment, a lot of narration in the
first term and a half with kinds... that support independent choices and learning
choices… and also good learning together or team learning to achieve a goal. Then
after that, that’s when we start the plan aspect. The plan-do-review… this year group
are still on the positive narration…” (for what helps create an environment for meta
learning) [Primary head, 10th
Jun, 12:05]

53. 46
A final factor in planning should be mentioned. Apparently, due to the time of the year,
the school is focusing on the state stipulated early learning goals for all students. A few students
(around 15%) are behind their needed scores. As a result the classes are geared to address their
needs and support the slowest learner. Hence, teachers consistently struggle to add variety once
the basic task goal has been achieved by the child. The learning caters to the learning target for
that class or lesson.
The ability to add complexity to the task is limited or not practiced. Even in an
experienced teacher’s classroom (the primary head) when the child has dis-engaged from the
task due to boredom or difficulty (see table 5) the teacher struggles to change the situation.
There is a constant modelling and repeating of the same set of instructions to stay with the task.
The teachers goes on repeating herself. Changing the situation or advising a new task is not
used. Children ‘switch off’ from the task during activity time often. Children are caught
running and are threatened by behavioural consequences which is non-self-regulatory.
4.2.3 RQ3: How does instrumental support reflect in practice?
In addition to instances in the classroom and planning three instances of instrumental
support in practice was observed across the school. These are instances are specific and are
discussed in detail below.
Topic
In alignment with the national curriculum the reception and Grade1 students (as well
as other primary classes) the children spend the afternoon on ‘Topic’. The vision for Topic at
Key Stage 1 amongst others is presented below

54. 47
Picture 4: Vision for Topic at Key Stage 1
• to provide children with rich and engaging experiences linked to their literacy
learning in order to deepen their knowledge and understanding of the topic and
empower them to produce interesting, imaginative and creative pieces of writing
in their literacy lessons;
• to provide varied, exciting and challenging opportunities for children to develop
their communication and language skills and to support their personal, social and
emotional development;
• to provide opportunities for children to develop as independent learners;
• to teach children the KS1 objectives from the National Curriculum for the
following subject areas: Geography, History, Science, Art and Design, Design
Technology and Music.
These choices are reflected in the following sample of Topic activities in reception.

55. 48
• Children are set a complex task of
planning how they will create their
own transport
• This task is aligned to the theme of the
half-term which is journeys
• Before they go into the construction
area they are required to make a plan
on how they will spend their time
• This is modelled by their teacher as
shown in the second sheet just behind
the laminated ‘workshop’ planning
sheet in this picture
• In the construction area the students
have access to bricks, tyres (pictured)
planks, chucks to execute their plans
• They also see how plans change and
what they need to do. For example the
second picture shows how they needed
to learn do place bricks around a chuck
as they built their “car”
• This equipment is tidied up by the
children and remains in the play area
for the half term and is used for
different things. This half term the
children will go through road, water
and air transport over the 7 weeks
Varied academic tasks
Varied tasks are also reflected in the classroom in each subject. We explore the
typical trajectory of a reception writing task

56. 49
This is a sample of a spider mind map that a child drew before commencing a writing task
The student then writes a sentence or more using the spider map made by him / her in the step
before
Examples of written work go into the student owned ‘journal’ for this half term. The journal is a
compilation of drawings, colouring and writing work a student might do

57. 50
The green box indicates what the student has done well and the yellow box highlights areas for
progress
1 of 2: Exceptional content is marked and transferred to the golden book with teacher comments

58. 51
2 of 2: Exceptional content is marked and transferred to the golden book with teacher comments
Feedback for learning and peer support
The students are aware that their learning involves feedback from the teacher. This
happens before each Mathematics lesson. It also happens in literacy but is via trackers for
writing in the students journals as discussed earlier in RQ2.
Picture 5: Feedback for learning in the timetable posted in the classroom

59. 52
Using their trackers the students are able to assess where they are and what needs
work. This was reflected in the interview with the teacher for grade1, excerpt below.
On monitoring their own progress
“We’ve got basically trackers for each of them (the students) and they know the
marking system so they know that is they got green that means they got an there are
secure with that concept. If they got yellow that means we still need to work for it….
Next day in feedback for learning let’s say... they will know right I got... yellow that
means I did not really get it and we’re going to try again together. [T3, pre-interview,
2nd
Jun, 13:32]
In some circumstances if the entire class has a misconception then the teacher will
conduct a revision lesson. During a lesson the teachers allow students to access peer group
support as is needed through the tasks or the subject content for the week.
“certain tasks for example writing would be in a mixed ability group but for maths they
might work within one group of same ability. But the children change groups often so
they are not aware.. they change on a weekly basis on what I found out what they can do..
and I’ll move them around based on whether they are ready for the next task or they need
to go back and do it again” [T1 pre-int2of2, 3rd
Jun, 05:00]
When the support structure of peer partners is missing this can impact how a lesson or a
day evolves as was reflected on this day of observation when half the class was missing due to
chicken pox!
On if there was anything unusual about this lesson
“children are used to having their talk partners, when there are far fewer children in
the classroom (chicken pox had hit the school) then they think it is a holiday and are
not as well behaved or on task” [T1 post-int2of2, 10th
Jun, 01:57]

60. 53
4.2.4 RQ4: What is the support teachers have to enable instrumental support in the
classroom?
The in-class instances of instrumental support are underpinned by the school vision
crafted and maintained by the school leadership team. This vision percolates through and is
reflected in teacher actions and systems discussed in RQs one to three. This vision and the
systems are supported by modelling of ideal student support by the primary head and leadership
by the leaders. Finally, the school-wide systems ensure the teachers can focus on adaptive
learning in the classroom.
The school vision is set by the principal. An analysis of the 30 minute interview with
the principal reveals 13 instances on where he sets the vision for the primary school. This
ranges from the broad to the detailed. For example he says:
“So we want this to be a school which sets children on a path of choice and
opportunity… we want the children to have a choice to go to a great university, when
they finish, when they are eighteen. And that means they need to have a set of... develop
a set of skills that are kind of character, attitudes, traits and get some really great
qualifications. And so we think then back through the school at each stage what will
give us confidence that the children are on a path to that. And so in early years we
want the children to develop key academic skills, character traits and umm kind of
particular knowledge and subject specific skills. And so that kind of aspiration which
is about access to a great university, that is the core of what we are thinking and the
choice – our children may not choose to go to the university but we want them to have
the choice to go. And also (for) them to think about being great parents themselves
in the future. So those things are on my mind. [HM Interview, 02:25]
This vision informs choices within the school
“…there is much more variation in schools than across schools in the UK. So the
difference between the best and the worst teacher in the school is huge. And so making
sure that behaviour… you can go into the most dysfunctional school and you will find
10, 15, 20 even more of the teachers who have fantastic classrooms with children
learning well. We did not want this to be a school where you had to serve an ‘x’

61. 54
amount of time before children followed your instructions and learnt well. And so for
us then setting up really clear systems”. [HM Interview, 02:25]
This vision underpins the “Common Picture”. A school document that details the classroom
and school wide systems to help the school team move ahead together. The document covers,
amongst others the discipline code including procedures and routines, school values, and the
reason why these procedures are followed. These routines are enshrined in the perspective of
what is important for the students learning and why these are needed. These are best explained
by the two HM quotes below.
Quote 1 of 2: “I think we, the school, is a chattier place now than it was three years ago.
Because when we started I think we equated, consistency and order with quiet and it was
developmental, well, that was at odds with the progress that we wanted to see. We needed
to get children talking more. So there were examples of where things shifted and things
have evolved.”[HM interview]
Classroom procedures such as feedback for learning, positive narration, mini plenaries,
visual success criteria and 100% participation are school wide procedures. They pervade the
planning for all teacher led lessons and TA support. This ensures familiar building blocks for
the child’s learning. A sample of the in-class systems is shown in table two below. These
systems underpin our analysis of the school and classes in RQ1.
Quote 2 of 2: “I think with families we feel like, that is a key potential barrier and huge
opportunity where if you can really get parents on board with what you are excited about
and what their children are doing, that can really help and also avoid / support children
when there is trauma and uncertainty at home, give them as much consistency as possible.
I think you know people love consistency. The more we can support our families, the
better.” [HM Interview]

62. 55
Table 14: Sample from the school wide "Common Picture" document that details school systems and procedures
Teacher
Action
Purpose Sample Rationale
Precise
Praise
To recognize pupils, in
precise and concrete
ways, who do
exceptional things.
Class, look up from
your independent
work. I want you all
to see the
exceptional thinking
Nayana just did.
She used the X
strategy to solve the
math problem,
which meant time
was spent efficiently
and her answer was
accurate.
1. Pupils feel
authentically
recognized for the
moments when they
go above and
beyond.
2. A sense of
community is built in
the classroom.
3. Others want to
replicate these
actions because the
teacher/another
pupil has explained
precisely what
someone did and
what the impact
was.
In line with the above the routines ensure consistency in all class transition from teacher
directed learning, to group work (talk tasks) and independent learning. These cover teacher
calls to action, school routines at lunch, school arrivals and departures. An indicative list
from the ‘common picture’ is shown below
Table 15: Indicative list of school and class procedures to ensure consistency
Classroom Procedures School Wide Procedures Academic Procedures
- I-We-You Procedural
Lessons
- School-wide:
Transition between
Desks and Rug
- The Intro, I Do and We
Do
- Maths Transitions
- Choosing Your Activity
- Year 1 Morning Arrival
- Morning Meeting
- Breakfast Club
- Lunch Procedures
- Table Expectations
- Lunch Dismissal: Year
1 to class; Reception
to playground
- Reflection Time
- Classroom Tidy Up
- Year 1 Packing Up
- Reception Packing Up
- Dismissal
- Finishing Work Early
- Talk Partners
- Handwriting
Expectations
- Group Work
- Voice Rubrics
- Absent Pupil Work
(Collection and
Expectations)
- Independent Reading
(Used during DEAR)
- Class Jobs
- Class Library