Description
Readings
in EDAT 6115 this week focused on the elements of effective instruction and improving
student achievement using student grouping, differentiated instruction, and integrated
technology. As Slavin (2018) stated “from the day they walk into school,
students differ in their knowledge, skills, motivations, and predispositions
toward what is about to be taught” (p. 216). Being able to identify and accommodate
these differences is key for teachers to be effective in today’s classrooms.
Analysis
Much
research has been done to define and characterize effective instruction. Based
on ideas of John Carroll from the 60’s and 80’s, Slavin created the QAIT model in
1995 that focuses on the “alterable elements” of classroom instruction (Slavin,
2018, p. 214). These elements (quality, appropriateness, incentive, and time) are
all within the control of the school or teacher to modify for effective instruction
(Slavin, 2018). The QAIT model requires that each of these elements is an equal
component in achieving effective instruction.
The focus on quality
of instruction requires that educators work to create lessons that students can
follow, learn from, and have meaningful engagement with. “When instruction is
high quality, the information presented makes sense to students, interests
them, and is easy to remember and apply” (Slavin, 2018, p. 215). The focus on appropriate
instruction requires that educators create lessons that target learners where
they are. Each student has different readiness and ability levels that
contribute to lesson efficacy. The use of differentiated instruction allows teachers
to adapt and modify instruction for individual needs within the classroom. Varied
instructional strategies and tools can be used to accommodate for individual
differences or strategic grouping could be used to supplement the learning of
specific individuals. Grouping can also be used for high-achieving group to
extend or enhance learning. Incentive to learn is another key element
that can impact instructional effectiveness. Some students bring a large amount
of intrinsic motivation to the classroom; others require extrinsic motivation
to learn. Regardless of the source, students must find some incentive to
participate and engage in the learning process. The use incentives like “praise,
feedback, grades, certificates, stars, prizes, access to fun activities, and
other rewards” work to increase motivation (Slavin, 2018, p. 216). Incorporating
problem and project-based learning opportunities can also lead to increased
incentive to learn because the knowledge gained is valuable and applicable to the
product. The last element in effective instruction is time. Creating an
environment that is organized, well-managed, free of distractions, and prioritized
for learning allows students to maximize time learning and engaging in lessons
(Slavin, 2018).
Various strategies for
grouping have been used by school systems and classroom teachers to better
serve students. Between-class groupings and within-class groupings are both ways
in which teachers and schools accommodate for differences in abilities (Slavin,
2018). It is common practice for schools (in particular, high schools) to form
homogenous groups of students based on ability levels within content areas
creating sections of classes that are designed for on-level, advanced, or
remedial instruction. Between-class groupings such as this allow for better
quality lessons, more appropriate accommodations, greater incentive, and better
use of time to create more effective lessons for more students. Because differences
in baseline knowledge and pace of learning are among the most difficult to
differentiate for, these homogeneous groups make the process more attainable
for teachers within the classroom (Slavin, 2018). If students are already grouped
based on ability, then differentiation for specific strengths and weaknesses
within the classroom are very effective. If the classes are heterogeneously grouped,
effective teachers still have “a variety of ways to informally accommodate the
needs of different learners” (Slavin, 2018, p. 222). Within-class groupings can serve a multitude
of purposes including providing opportunities for students to enrich learning,
remediate learning, or work on affective skills and collaboration. The use of heterogenous
grouping within a classroom can create great learning by creating opportunities
for peer learning, exploring differences in perspective, and completing complex
problem-solving tasks through collaboration.
The incorporation of
one-on-one tutoring or mentoring programs is an option for accommodating some
of our most at-risk students. If students show strong academic deficits, social
and emotional concerns, or socioeconomic hardships, mentors and tutors are
often a great supplement to work being done in the classroom. Compensatory
education programs, such as Title I, allot additional funding to support
programs for at-risk and high-risk students to close achievement gaps (Slavin,
2018). Outside of school hours, Title I funds are increasingly being used to
provide after-school and summer enrichment programs aimed at extending the time
for students to be engaged in learning. Research has found “that struggling
children can be helped by extending instructional time for them, especially if
the additional time is used for targeted instructional activities” (Slavin, 2018,
p. 228).
Reflection
As a new teacher nearly seventeen years ago, I remember
being overwhelmed by the idea of differentiating instruction for every student
in my classroom. To be honest, even now this seems like a daunting task as I begin
each year with new students, each brining their own individual differences into
my classroom. However, I have learned that meeting student needs begins with first
understanding what those needs are. I primarily teach highly motivated,
intelligent, knowledge-seeking, gifted students that are enrolled in my courses
by choice. Although my students share many characteristics, they do not have
the same previous knowledge, learning styles or abilities, or emotional characteristics
as one another. As an AP teacher, I have very little wiggle room with the
ability to differentiate content as they all need to be at the same place prior
to a May AP Exam. However, I can regularly differentiate by product and
process. This allows me to meet student needs in ways that support their
mastery of content.
For me, technology has been a game changer in the differentiation game. Technology allows me to instruct, assess, and differentiate learning for all students more effectively. I have found that technology enhanced instruction is more engaging for my students, providing information in a format they are used to seeing. It is fast-paced, interactive, and visually appealing. My district uses a learning management system (Canvas) that holds our course content, grades, assessments, and collaboration tools. This one-stop-shop is great for organizing and delivering high quality lessons digitally. I also love that students can review content, videos, and lectures as many times as needed to feel confident in what they are learning. This system allows me to provide struggling students with supplemental materials and excelling students with enrichment opportunities easily at the same time. I have also enjoyed using technology to enhance my assessment strategies and abilities. I can quickly and effectively assess student learning through a variety of assessments using technology that provide instant results and feedback for myself and the students. This provides with me the information needed to differentiate to best meet my students’ needs. Slavin (2018) suggested the use of interactive games, simulations, useful apps, and the internet as ways to enhance student learning with technology. I have had great success with the incorporation of these tools in my advanced science courses and honestly, I could not imagine teaching without them.
Reference
Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory
and Practice (12th ed.). Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment