Scaffolding Instruction with the Gradual Release of Responsibility: A Science of Reading Approach

The Science of Reading provides a robust framework for understanding how children learn to read, emphasizing evidence-based practices and structured support. Central to this framework are the "Big Five" components: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Scaffolding instruction through the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) ensures that these components are taught systematically and explicitly, helping students build strong foundational skills while transitioning from guided practice to independent application of reading strategies. Below, we detail the stages of scaffolding instruction and their connection to the Science of Reading principles.

1. Teacher Modeled

In this foundational stage, the teacher introduces a specific reading strategy by:

• Explicitly explaining the strategy and its purpose, such as recognizing phonemes or decoding unfamiliar words.
• Providing examples and modeling its application on small segments of text, like blending sounds or identifying key vocabulary.
• Thinking aloud to demonstrate how to apply the strategy effectively, focusing on comprehension or fluency development.

This phase is critical for building students' understanding and awareness of the strategy while grounding it in one of the Big Five components, such as phonemic awareness or phonics. By breaking down the steps and modeling the cognitive processes, teachers lay the groundwork for students to begin internalizing the approach.

2. Teacher Structured

Once students grasp the basics of the strategy, the teacher transitions to a structured phase:

• Selecting text that presents clear opportunities to apply the strategy.
• Encouraging students to read small chunks of text to ensure comprehension.
• Observing students closely and recording observations to track progress.
• Providing targeted prompts and scaffolds to guide students as they practice the strategy.

This stage emphasizes structured practice, allowing students to build confidence while still relying on teacher support to ensure success.

3. Teacher Guided

At this stage, the teacher gradually reduces their direct involvement, fostering more student independence:

• Asking probing questions about the strategy to deepen understanding.
• Assigning larger chunks of text for students to read and analyze.
• Encouraging students to take notes as they read, setting a clear purpose for their work.
• Facilitating discussions where students articulate their thinking and engage with peers.
• Soliciting student responses and guiding them through the strategy steps rather than providing direct answers.

This phase bridges the gap between structured support and autonomous learning, reinforcing critical thinking and collaborative skills.

4. Teacher Cued

In the teacher-cued stage, the teacher shifts from guiding to prompting, encouraging students to take ownership of their learning:

• Asking questions such as, “What is our strategy?” to prompt students to recall and articulate the strategy’s steps, importance, and applications.
• Assigning entire texts for students to read independently, ensuring they apply phonics or decoding strategies to unfamiliar words.
• Requiring students to set their own purposes for reading and take comprehensive notes, focusing on comprehension and fluency.
• Providing cues as needed to reinforce strategy application without taking over the process, particularly when addressing vocabulary and comprehension challenges.

This stage ensures that students can independently apply the strategy while still benefiting from occasional teacher cues to address challenges across all Big Five components.

5. Student Directed

In the final stage, students assume full responsibility for using the strategy, either independently or within small groups:

• Extending instruction time to help students internalize the strategy’s multiple steps.
• Practicing the strategy across diverse texts to build fluency and adaptability.
• Conducting daily informal assessments to monitor student progress and adjust the level of support accordingly.
• Avoiding premature withdrawal of support, ensuring students are fully prepared for independent application.

Teaching for Independence

It is essential for teachers to understand that their ultimate goal is fostering student independence. The integrated emphasis on both cognition and metacognition serves as a means to scale instructional sequences effectively. This process, moving from teacher-directed to student-directed learning, has been labeled by various terms such as "joint participation," "cognitive apprenticeship" (Honig), and "letting them [students] take charge." Scaffolding instruction ensures that students can eventually solve "print problems" successfully and independently.

Differences Between Scaffolding and "I Do, We Do, They Do, On Their Own"

While the "I Do, We Do, They Do, On Their Own" model and the Gradual Release of Responsibility share foundational principles, there are critical differences:

1. Depth of Cognitive Engagement:
2. Nuanced Stages:
3. Flexibility and Individualization:
4. Application Across Contexts:

Why Scaffolding is Better

Research supports scaffolding as a superior instructional approach due to its emphasis on developing both cognitive and metacognitive skills. Educational researcher Lev Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) underpins scaffolding by highlighting that learners perform best when guided within their ZPD by a knowledgeable other. More recently, Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey (2008, 2014) expanded on this foundation, refining the Gradual Release of Responsibility model to emphasize the iterative process of scaffolding. Their work demonstrates that scaffolding facilitates a deeper understanding and more effective transfer of knowledge compared to linear models like "I Do, We Do, They Do." John Hattie (2009) also identified scaffolding as a high-impact instructional strategy in his meta-analysis, confirming its positive effects on student achievement.

Real-Life Classroom Examples

1. Teacher Modeled Example: In a second-grade classroom, the teacher introduces the strategy of summarizing by reading a short paragraph aloud and thinking aloud to model how to identify the main idea and key details.
2. Teacher Structured Example: The teacher selects a passage about the life cycle of a butterfly. Students read the text in pairs, pausing to underline key points while the teacher circulates, offering prompts like, “What’s the most important fact in this section?”
3. Teacher Guided Example: Students read a more complex article on ecosystems in small groups, highlighting information and creating summary charts. The teacher facilitates a discussion, asking, “How did you decide what was important?”
4. Teacher Cued Example: When students are reading a full chapter on renewable energy, the teacher occasionally asks, “What strategy are you using to understand this section?” and encourages them to reflect on their process.
5. Student Directed Example: A group of fifth graders selects a nonfiction book about space exploration, independently using strategies like note-taking and summarizing to create a presentation for the class.

Equity and Accessibility

Scaffolding instruction also supports diverse learners, including English Language Learners (ELLs), students with disabilities, and those from underrepresented backgrounds. Teachers can:

• Use culturally relevant texts to make strategies more engaging and meaningful.
• Offer visual aids, such as graphic organizers, to support comprehension.
• Provide additional modeling and practice for students who need more time to grasp concepts.

Key Takeaways

• The Gradual Release of Responsibility framework ensures a seamless transition from teacher-led to student-directed learning.
• Each stage builds on the previous one, reinforcing skills and fostering independence.
• Teachers play a crucial role in monitoring progress and providing just-in-time support to prevent frustration or stagnation.
• Aligning this approach with the Science of Reading principles ensures that instruction is systematic, explicit, and evidence-based.
• Incorporating culturally responsive practices enhances the relevance and accessibility of instruction.

Conclusion and Call to Action

By following this structured progression, teachers can equip students with the tools they need to become proficient, confident readers capable of navigating a wide range of texts. As educators, it is our responsibility to ensure that every student, regardless of background or ability, has the opportunity to develop essential reading skills. Let’s commit to fostering independence through purposeful, scaffolded instruction and ensuring that all learners reach their full potential.

Bibliography

• Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching. Guilford Press.

• Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008, 2014). Better Learning Through Structured Teaching: A Framework for the Gradual Release of Responsibility. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
• Lavert, G., & Bellancea, J. (2025). Who Says I Can't (A Four-Year Plan to Erase the Reading Gap and Achieve Proficiency for Fourth Grade), Solution Tree.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.