DI for the (Mostly) Younger Set

The readings this week offered more direct examples of DI in literacy situations, as well as common literacy problems students have. I thought it was interesting in the Brown and Morris article how some low spellers were able to regurgitate spelling words for the test but “were unable to spell these same patterns even a week later,”(p. 168). That sounds like the classic cramming study behavior of a college student.

I was not surprised to see the classic rule of 3 under Brown and Morris’ organization of spelling instruction. I was also not surprised to read that their reading groups and spelling groups were relatively similar. I liked that this article offered different tangible activities to do in the classroom. I particularly liked the partner game day activities: memory, racetrack, bingo and speed sort. I think this article made a good point about quality intervention, the longer it takes for a teacher to intervene the farther the student will fall behind and “the spelling achievement ‘gap’ will be easiest to close before it starts to widen,”(p. 181).

My favorite article from this week was But They All Read at Different Levels by Laura Robb. I liked that it directly answered real questions about differentiated instruction. I liked the examples of tiered activities. This made the whole idea of tiered activities much simpler. With this as a reminder I can now think back to literacy projects I did in elementary school and how the choices we were given was a method of differentiated instruction. I often chose to make posters for book reports rather than dioramas or do a dramatic monologue about the book. I can see how technology in the classroom now opens even more doors for options for tiered activities such as moviemaking (as Robb mentions), PowerPoint, Prezi, online book talks, book trailers etc. I remember making a terrible video for a book report in the eighth grade in which my group and I acted out a scenario we wrote as the characters of a certain book. But it was made with a VHS camcorder and may as well be considered Stone Age technology now. It will be interesting to see how technology continues to impact literacy instruction. Regarding book trailers I found this great site that is all book trailers for books for third grade and up: http://www.slimekids.com/book-trailers/. This is a great link that spans more grades and gives more insight behind the stories: http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/65-book-videos-build-excitement-summer-reading. An example is a trailer for Lily Brown's Paintings by Angela Johnson which I posted just before this post because it was having trouble uploading to this post.

Another thing I appreciated about the articles this week was that they were more focused on younger elementary grades (since that is my focus) rather than upper elementary or middle school. The Tobin and McInnes (2008) article provided great insight into real life differentiation in a primary classroom. Since we spend so much time discussing small group instruction I found this quote important:

“Researchers found small-group instruction (three students) to be just as effective as one-to-one instruction in developing reading skills such as phoneme segmentation, fluency and comprehension, while the former study documents the success of mixed-ability groupings (four to five students) to achieve fluency and comprehension in reading at the primary level,”(p. 4).

I already believed that small group instruction was more effective than whole group, but it is good to know that it is believed to be as effective as one-on-one interaction with the teacher. 

Lily Brown's Paintings - Book Trailer

Equalizing DI

The readings this week were much easier for me to understand. They offered similar yet varying perspectives on differentiated instruction and the idea of using graphic organizers in the classroom. My only issue with this topic is that they would be quite difficult to use in a kindergarten or first grade class room.

The Tomlinson text did a good job of explaining different methods of differentiation: foundational to transformational, concrete to abstract, simple to complex etc. While these individual parts made sense I’m not sure about the whole equalizer metaphor.

I did however like this Tomlinson quote: “All students need lessons that are coherent, relevant, powerful, transferable, authentic, and meaningful,”(p. 49). This pretty much sums up the need for differentiated instruction. I think the Tomlinson readings this week really cleared up the three different types of differentiation. I also liked its explanation of learning profile differentiation as ensuring that a student has a way of “coming at” materials and ideas that match his preferred way of learning.

One thing I would like to discuss in class is the idea of curriculum compacting. In theory I think it is a good idea but I’m not sure how you would be able to implement it in a large class. I also think it might be difficult to implement in an early elementary classroom, though I think it would work well in an upper elementary or middle school classroom. I also wondered about the idea of using varied texts. Tomlinson suggests asking the district for three small sets of three different texts. We discussed in class how many teachers choose to completely disregard school curriculum, but since this is so closely related to the budget, I’m not sure how easy it would be without district support. Magazines, brochures and newsletters however would be easy for teachers to collect on their own.

Remember these:

I do have a little knowledge about the idea of learning contracts. The alternative high school in Wenatchee works solely through learning contracts. The teacher and student draw it up and then the student works almost completely independently out of a book or on pre-determined projects. Obviously in elementary school this would have more guidance, which I think is appropriate. From what I saw the learning contracts at this school were mainly pacing guides so the student could attain the credits as quickly or slowly as they wanted. It depends solely on their motivation. It was easy to tell if they were dedicated to their work and easier to tell if they weren't  To me it seemed like the students who weren’t as dedicated didn’t get much out of it.

The McMackin and Witherell article was of the most interest to me because it was one of the first to mention how English Language Learners are effected by differentiation. This article says that by 2030 about 40 percent of children will come from homes where English is not the native language. This is already the case in Wenatchee where the population is nearly 50/50 Caucasian and Hispanic. The demographics of a school district definitely impacts many factors including differentiation. I believe diversity of some sort is so essential in the classroom to bring different ideas and teach students about different types of families and cultures. What are some of the ways you have seen ELL students involved in differentiation? How have you see other cultures involved in the classroom?

Differentiating Reading Instruction

 The textbook readings this week had many points in common.

1.      The importance of constant, quality assessment

2.      Develop varied ways students can explore their learning

3.      Teach up.

4.      Clue in to your student’s interests.

5.      Share responsibility of learning with students

The readings were all important, but somewhat repetitive since they all seemed to cite each other’s research. My favorite of the textbooks so far is the Tomlinson text. Not only do I like the way the information is presented (I find it quite a bit easier to read) but I also like that it seems to delve more into the emotional effects of outside lives on the learning and behavior of  children. “Some kids come at the world with their dukes up. Life is a fight for them in part because the belligerence that surrounds them spawns belligerence in them,”(Tomlinson, p. 14).

The readings this week continued my questions about the difference between learning profiles and learning styles. Chapter 1 of Tomlinson discussed the difference between today’s differentiation and that of the 1970’s, “at least we understood that students have different learning profiles.” The Robb text also discusses Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences as the research base for differentiated instruction, which makes me wonder what exactly is the difference between multiple intelligences and learning styles? I can understand that different people have higher aptitudes in different areas (literacy, music, art, mathematics etc.) but does this effect or shape how they learn?

Another part of the readings this week that I was unsure about was the idea of tiering. Though all of the readings talked about it, I was confused by all the research jargon. While reading this week I also wondered how teachers can differentiate when they have a very rigid or strict curriculum guide set by their district or school. I like the idea Robb suggested when differentiating reading in a high school English class, three different books about the same topic at different levels, but is that realistic in every district? On a personal note, I thought it was a little interesting she completely disregarded To Kill A Mockingbird, that was one of the only high school curriculum books I really loved when I was in school.

I would also like to learn more about RTI. I attended some RTI meetings during my student teaching where the kindergarten team, vice principal, special education teacher and school counselor discussed individual students they were concerned about. Their concerns spanned from the student’s reading and complex thinking abilities to social problems and home life. So it wasn't until I read about it in these textbooks that I realized it was related to differentiated instruction.

One thing I liked about the readings this week was the discussion of the teaching to the lowest, middle and highest learners. Their points about advanced learners and struggling learns in particular were very important for teachers and all school employees to consider. I saw a lot of my own views of school in the “trappings of advanced learners”. Particularly about advanced learners becoming perfectionists (Tomlinson, p. 11). I know a lot of my friends that I grew up with and attended elementary school with also consider themselves to be perfectionists, sometimes to their own detriment. I think we wouldn't continue to put so much pressure on ourselves through school and as adults if our teachers had done more to support well-being rather than encouraging competition.  

Robb, L. (2008). Differentiating reading instruction: How to teach reading to meet the needs of each student. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Tomlinson, C. (2005). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. (2009). How to plan differentiated reading instruction: Resources for grades k-3. New York, NY: Guilford.

Changing Paradigms, Learning Styles, Art and Harry Potter

First I’m going to start with the video. I have always loved this video because it points out facts that are so often overlooked, particularly about ADHD in schools and school design. My view on ADHD diagnosis in young children is that they are behaving as young boys and girls do, with the addition of the fast-paced, instant gratification giving society we currently live in, it may make them want to sit still or pay attention for shorter amounts of time. I think the diagnosis is partially laziness on the part of the parents, teachers and other important adults in the child’s life. As the video points out, I don’t think that ADHD is completely made up, but I think it is widely over diagnosed. Looking at members of myself and members of mine own family, we often like to joke we are stricken with Larsen Adult ADD. We all have a hard time sitting still and focusing on one thing for long periods of time, unless it is a book. My dad was kicked out of kindergarten for being too wild, I can only imagine today that his pediatrician may have suggested a Ritalin prescription.

My other favorite part of the video is its discussion of school design, particularly when it discusses how schools were built to be like factories. The class I originally watched this in, a T&L class whose name I can’t quite remember, we went on to discuss how schools architecture then went on to be built to resemble prisons and are now built to look like malls. I always got a kick out of this because the same person who designed my high school, Wenatchee High School, also designed Chelan County Jail. The whole building which had between 2000 and 2200 students during my time there had a handful of windows in the classrooms. My friends and I were always excited when we got our new schedules and found out one of our rooms had a window. Even though the windows were often placed in the back corner of the room, away from the white board. My junior year they remodeled the front of the school and added a big window façade (go figure) and a new common area and a very small outdoor eating area we referred to as “The Cage” because it was cement on all sides and instead of having open air pillars there were metal grates to keep students in. Very bizarre, yet somehow appropriate with the design of the rest of the school.

This is the new front of the school circa 2007.

Now onto the readings. The Stahl piece, Different Strokes for Different Folks: A Critique of Learning Styles was interesting because it cited so much research that invalidated information that is often shoved down our throat in Human Development and T&L classes. I distinctly remember studying Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences for tests and having to identify for class which of the intelligences I fall under. As a teacher we are taught to incorporate many different kinds of activities into any given lesson: hands on, physical movement, art, manipulatives, drama etc. While I think the incorporation of these different activities is just good practice to get all students involved and excited about the lesson, it’s interesting to know this may not necessarily impact their learning or retention of information solely because there are different options. Although this is where I question the research against learning styles because if a child is more involved and excited about their learning, aren’t they more likely to retain it? Or is it just a fun activity that then exits their brain as quickly as a boring kill and drill exercise. I found the Smagorinsky article to contradict the idea that students do not learn more or gain more out of a lesson if they enjoy it more or make personal connections to it. “Without this process of personal examples to enrich school understandings, academic knowledge is hollow and difficult to construct meaning for,”(p.199). I did appreciate Stahl’s explanation of the learning styles as “Gardner’s attempt to expand the notion of what we think is intelligent behavior to people who are skilled in music, or dance or even in interpersonal relations,”(Stahl, 1999). This is at least one part of Gardner’s work that I find to be truly important, if he at all helped legitimize the arts as part of a school curriculum.

The Smagorinsky article on Vygotsky was my favorite this week because it gave some historical background that I had never considered before and was so relatable to practical application in the classroom. Something we have all dealt with either in school or in our adult lives is being shut down by another person mid-sentence. This never feels good no matter what age you are and it seems to happen in K-12 classes all the time, whether it is from a lack of time to have a real discussion or a power trip on the part of the teacher/student. I think Vygotsky is completely right in his idea that the feeling of inferiority that stems from this repeatedly happening is more debilitating than any actual learning disability a student may have.

Prior to reading this article I didn’t realize that Vygotsky was such an art enthusiast or his background in literature. I loved his emphasis on meta-experience and imagination, particularly “Thus, a person does not simply think about art, or respond emotionally to it, but has emotional reactions that when reflected upon, enable a person to consider more profoundly the depths of the human experience,”(Smagorinsky, p. 195). I love art and plan to widely incorporate it in my classroom, whether it is art projects or students learning about different famous artists. I also think art is a great way to incorporate different cultures into the classroom and let kids practice creativity and fine motor skills in a safe space, which Vygotsky goes on to discuss as mentioned later in the article. My own love of art started when I was very little and my grandma brought me a children’s book based around Degas paintings from her trip to Paris. These are a few of the books I have purchased to build my art library:

 

I found this article drawing a lot of similarities to the video, especially when it discusses how not all children are represented in their own schools which may be “dedicated to the values of the white middle class,”(Smagorinsky, p. 196). The article goes on to further discuss cultural inclusion in the classroom through different art forms such as hip hop which of course made me think of this:

The questions I drew from this article were:

1. What are ways to include more exploratory thought in elementary school classrooms
2. How does the slant toward standardized testing impact student’s ability to use exploratory thought?
3. How do you currently or plan to incorporate student's cultures into your classroom?

I found the Davila and Patrick article to be a whole lot of “No Duh!!” information. I was almost tempted to throw in “Oh Really?! With Seth and Amy”. Of course a kid is going to want to read the Harry Potter series or Captain Underpants instead of a Newberry award winner with a boring name. I did find it interesting (and completely reflected in my own life) when it was mentioned in the article that Harry Potter readers, “especially those that read all seven books in the series, were more passionate about reading than non-Potter readers in the study,”(p. 202). I read the Sorcerer’s Stone in the third grade after my mom randomly picked it up and thus began my life-long love of Harry Potter. Many of the books in the series were often released on my birthday so that made them extra special to me as I anxiously waited for the mailperson to bring me my favorite birthday present (which I would then start reading and barely stop for meals until I finished). I think the Harry Potter series is one of the big reasons my love of reading really took off and I think this is the same for many others my age and continues for the young children that are still discovering it. 

Finally, the Santangelo, Knotts, Clemmer and Mitchell article was very informative on parts of differentiated instruction that I did not previously understand. Though DI was emphasized in my undergraduate career I never heard the different types: content, process, and product, until this class. The best piece of advice I found from this article was Tomlinson’s edict on differentiation:

“We would differentiate better if we always expect too much of kids, rather than expect too little. When in doubt, teach up. I’ve never met a kid who couldn’t do more than I thought he or she could. Under the right circumstances, every kid can do more than we believe l we compliment them by giving them something that’s a little too hard and by helping them get there…”(p. 202).

I also loved their point that group activities need to be organized in a way that every child is able to have a prominent role and make a contribution that matters beyond jobs like “timekeeper” (You always knew the kids in the group that wanted that job just wanted to check out, even as a child). This article goes on to discuss learning profiles. Which a part of me is a little confused what the difference is between learning profile and learning style. What’s the difference? Is learning profile just made up of preferences for an optimal learning environment? But do those preferences make a difference when it comes down to the amount of learning going on?

So in conclusion most of my burning questions are coming from learning styles. I hope we read more on this in the future. While I understand that the research behind learning styles is completely lacking accountability, how similar is it to learning preferences or profiles or any of the other language these other articles used? I agree that learning styles may be a big piece of teacher folklore, but I think it is important to consider children’s “preferences” so that they feel at home in the classroom.