The industrial
revolution is over.
The world no longer requires all students to become factory
workers with an identical skillset, to work in a production line and follow
orders. No two children are alike. They are products of genetics and most
importantly, the environments they grow up in. Children have different
strengths and areas to improve. They learn and develop at different rates, in
different ways. Children have different interests; they’re engaged or bored by
different activities. It is impossible for a class of learners to be identical.
So why would teachers teach to one group (the middle), in one way? That would
be unfair. Unfair on the children who cannot access the learning objectives and
unfair on the children who will never be able to pursue learning in any way but
the one they are comfortable in. Teaching to the “middle” of the class does not
produce creative, intrinsically motivated learners.
What does an
inclusive, differentiated classroom look like?
·
Students are engaged and motivated – Childhood
is FOR learning (Gopnik, 2011), so it’s important that students want to learn.
Engaged, motivated students develop a love of learning.
·
Learning is valued over performance – (Fixed
versus open mindset). When an end of topic test, accompanied by a grade, is the
only form of assessment used, students receive a message and develop
expectations about themselves. Whether they always expect themselves to do
poorly, or they always expect themselves to get an “A”, schooling with a focus
on the importance of the final grade does not inspire success or a love of
learning. Teachers should use a variety of assessment methods. Pre-assessment
shows students where they began and tells the teacher what they already know.
Formative assessment gives the opportunity for students to reflect on their
learning along the way and informs teaching. Summative assessment can be
compared to the pre-assessment so that students can see how far they’ve come
and informs the teacher for the next time they teach a similar topic.
·
Students are challenged by relevant, meaningful
learning experiences – The best learning occurs at the right level of challenge
for each individual at their level of readiness and students should be able to
apply learning to their own lives.
·
It is inclusive – Students work with people of
similar and different ability (readiness). Students have opportunities to work
as a class, in groups or individually, on topics of interest using a variety of
modes of work. All students are able to meaningfully participate, learn and
feel that they belong.
·
Instruction is differentiated – Differentiation
is a philosophy of teaching to support inclusion of all students. The teacher
makes pedagogical choices, based on principles of inclusion, to proactively
plan to address student differences.
Analysis of a school
mission statement
What appears to be
the school’s philosophy and values related to teaching diverse learners?
East Torrens Primary
School supports a diverse student group comprised of the regional special needs
classes, 7 mainstream classes and 8 Intensive English Language Program (IELP)
classes. Special education is a major, school wide emphasis, not only in the 2
special needs classes. The school has a motto, “Building a community of
successful learners”, and aims to create a success oriented culture where
students are empowered to reach their full potential as successful citizens,
workers and decision makers, now and into the future. The four school values
are community, empathy, multiculturalism and excellence. There is an ongoing
need to plan for student differences as 80% of students have English as an
Additional Language or Dialect (EALD). Children with Autism (ASD) and health
needs are strongly supported in mainstream classes through having SSO support,
with a number funded to have 1:1 support. Within the IELP there are Bilingual
School Support Officers (BSSO) to support students in their mother tongue in
targeted languages according to most common need. Negotiated Education Plans
(NEP) are designed in collaboration with leadership, teachers, parents and
students for all children in special needs classes and children with funded
support. Every child in the school has termly SMART
(strategic, measurable, attainable, realistic, time-bound) goals targeting the
improvement of reading and number skills – this was as a result of analysing
the NAPLAN test.
Given this
philosophy, what specific practices might occur?
·
Teacher training to be aware of cultural diversity
– religious, country of origin, the ways that trauma affects students views and
attitudes towards learning
·
IELP is structured to best skill student
language and literacy levels to manage in a mainstream classroom and give them
the skills to know what the expectations are of students in South Australian
schools.
·
The school uses diagnostic testing to best
establish the needs of individual students. Carefully structured support is
given to students according to readiness levels to promote academic achievement.
Allocating students into wave 1, 2 and 3 is an education department directive
in order to define the needs of students in regards to literacy and numeracy.
·
NAPLAN results were dissected to analyse areas
for school wide improvement and address areas needing improvement. Teachers
could have access to ongoing training and development.
·
All staff and leaders could be involved in ASD
training to raise awareness about how to best include and cater for students
with Autism.
·
Teachers are expected to show differentiation in
their programming; listing expectations and outcomes for individual students’
entry points according to readiness, interest and learner profile.
·
Students are empowered with skills to manage
conflict/social issues, using social justice practices, which means that
classroom time can be used effectively for teaching and learning.
·
There is a debating team. This is one example
whereby a range of children is provided with the opportunity to participate in
a language rich, co-curricular activity.
·
The use of concrete materials and digital
technologies to consolidate concept development before moving to the abstract.
·
Assessed achievement of goals and communication
with parents to foster partnership between the school and the home. Staff
emphasise working with parents as a team to best support students.
·
No students are turned away from the school
(including students from the behaviour management unit, students with special
physical and academic needs. Inclusivity is a priority.
Observation of classroom
video – Year 2 Reading
https://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Farchive.teachfind.com%2Fttv%2Fwww.teachers.tv%2Fvideos%2Fmixed-ability-in-year-2.html?tab=people&uname=janemj
Clear, concept-based learning objectives and teaching for
deep understanding:
·
Using phonics (specifically ‘ee’, e.g. queen and oo, e.g. look) in reading.
Use of on-going assessment to learn about students’ needs
and inform differentiation:
·
The teacher was able to give students a word or
picture in an introductory activity based on previous experience of readiness
with each individual child, based on the learning objective.
·
The teacher lead group discussion and activities,
moved between groups, and worked with individuals. She would have taken notice
of student success and areas that needed more attention but did not (visibly)
record any written assessment.
Flexible grouping practices:
·
There are mixtures of high achieving students
who can read, write and create sentences and there are others who are still
learning their letter sounds.
·
Students worked on the floor and moved about the
classroom as a class, at tables, desks and to find a partner, as well as to
find a space to work individually.
·
The children are seated at mixed ability tables.
Students of lower ability are exposed to a higher quality of talk which doesn’t
come when a group of students who are all of lower ability are sitting together
with an adult leading the talk. More able children enjoy helping others;
consolidating what they know.
Proactive planning for differences in students’ readiness,
interests and learning preferences:
·
Pictures supplied as prompts for students who
may not immediately recognise the sounds of a written word.
·
The lesson is active to engage students who
don’t already know their sounds and to keep children who know the sounds
excited and interested in the lesson
·
Students were given a picture or word and had to
move around to find their partner with the corresponding word/picture. They
sounded out their word and listened for their partner. Some students could
immediately recognise the written word while others had to listen for the
sound.
·
Children had the opportunity to explore phonics
through speaking, reading, writing, drawing and acting-out a word with the
sound.
·
Shared writing, where the teacher models letter
formation, grammar and sentence structure, so the students who need more
practice can see how a sentence is written. The teacher uses examples,
non-examples and questioning. Even though it is not the focus of the lesson,
correct sentence structure is still expected for the sake of continuity.
·
Silly sentences allows the children to
experiment with the sounds and writing in an engaging way. They have ownership
over what they choose to write. There are picture prompts for students who need
examples of words with the focus sounds. The pictures give the students something
tangible to select to create their next sentence and give them a break from
writing if they need it. More advanced students need not rely on the pictures
and can construct sentences using words outside those they have been given.
·
Differentiation occurs more in outcome rather
than the teacher aiming it at a specific level for each child.
·
Guess the picture activity – consolidates words
that have the ‘ee’ or ‘oo’ sound and students have the opportunity to visually
represent it. Children can draw things that they can’t necessarily spell, while
still working towards the same outcomes as the rest of the class. Students can
then describe what they’ve drawn and go beyond what has already been discussed
with the rest of the class.
·
In the concluding activity students identified
words that had the ‘ee’ or ‘oo’ sound. Some students brought up new words which
they had identified themselves, others fell back on the words that they had
explored as a group.
A positive, inclusive learning environment:
·
Students work and present in flexible groups,
using a variety of modes of work, with learners of different abilities.
·
There is a positive ‘buzz’/classroom culture
where students seek help from, and support, each other.
·
Students had the opportunity to experience
success and show off their ‘best bit’ of the lesson. Every child sounded out a
word, even if it had already been used, and got to stand proudly at the front
of the class (the teacher also used this as a way of lining up the students for
recess).
·
As a result of working toward the learning
objective of the lesson, students were able to learn and practice other
literacy skills.
Other
recommendations/suggestions of effective differentiation strategies in a
similar lesson:
·
A rubric with student’s names against literacy
objectives to indicate whether a student needs more practice is developing or
has mastered a skill. There could also be space for a short comment (if
necessary). This is a simple way of keeping a record and informing future
teaching.
·
Students could create a word bank using specific
sounds. This could be done at varying levels of complexity to achieve the same
outcome; students identifying words that have the sound. It may include different
sound blends written on cards that can be put together to form a word, pictures,
acting/describing to a partner or words/pictures that the students can organise
into the correct sound group. This caters for; readiness due to varying levels
of complexity; interest because students choose their own words and learner
profile due to the different ways of expressing knowledge of word sounds.
·
Use of solid objects (e.g. farm animals) to
support sentence construction around a particular teaching point or letter
blends.
Here is a final story about a young man, who learned to love differentiation.
References:
Gopnik, A. (2011) What do babies think? TED
Global Conference 2011, Filmed July 2011, Posted October 2011, www.ted.com/talks/alison_gopnik_what_do_babies_think.html
