Journal Entry 6

Description:  Our reading in EDAT 6115 this week focused on diverse student needs in regards to grouping and differentiating instruction to meet their needs. In addition, our text revealed programs that could be used to address the needs of at-risk students.  Finally, the effective use of technology in academics was explored giving readers insight into how various types of technology and programs can be used to enhance instruction.

Analysis:  In a single classroom of 25 students, one can easily have 25 different learning needs.  How do teachers group students in the most effective manner, taking into consideration their unique learning needs?  There are two basic forms used to group students for instruction: between-class ability grouping and within-class ability grouping. 

• Between-class ability grouping is most common in middle, junior, and high school (Slavin, 2015).  This form of grouping encompasses students taking leveled courses according to their needs.  A student may be in an upper level reading class and in a lower level math class.  These courses are assigned to students based on their learning requirements, and they are then grouped as such.  Research on between-class ability grouping revealed that there are small benefits for this type of grouping for upper level students, but for those performing at lower levels, there seems to be a “stigmatizing effect” (Slavin, 2015) of always being in the “slow” classes.  These students generally get the message that academic success is out of their reach (Oakes, 2005 as cited in Slavin, 2015).

• Within-class ability grouping often takes place in elementary schools, but could be used in the upper grades, as well.  This type of grouping is used to place students in cooperative learning groups of small teacher-led groups according to their reading level, math achievement, or writing needs.  These students stay in the same classroom for their instruction, but they are placed in groups according to their specific needs.  Research has shown in elementary settings that within-class ability grouping is beneficial to all ability levels.  The benefits include increased direct instruction from the teacher in the smaller groups and the reduction in the amount of independent seat work (Slavin, 2015).  Slavin (2015) points out that although research shows that there are benefits to within-class ability grouping, this should not be taken as it being a desirable approach to instruction; it is simply the lesser of the two evils, so to speak. 

Differentiated instruction entails “teaching that adapts the content, level, pace, and products of instruction to accommodate the different needs of diverse students in regular classes” (Slavin, 2015).  O’Brien & Guiney (2001, as cited in Logan, 2011) “clearly enumerated these as major principles of differentiated instruction: 1) Every child can learn and every teacher can learn 2) All children have the right to high quality education. 3) Progress for all will be expected, recognized, and rewarded. 4) Learners in a classroom have common needs, distinct needs, and individual needs.”  All students are expected to meet the same standards within the curriculum; however, many students possess barriers that hinder their ability to access the material as easily as others.  In differentiated instruction, teachers employ strategies to level the playing field for students requiring additional support.  Langa and Yost (2007, as cited in Logan, 2011) provide suggestions for adjusting the content, process, and products of instruction:

• Content
• select text on varied reading levels and interests
• group students according to reading level or interests
• reteach material in small groups or individually
• establish learning stations
• allow peer tutoring
• Process
• use scaffolded activities
• allow independent study
• use choice boards, cooperative learning, and/or flexible groups
• Product
• provide choices based on interests
• allow group projects
• provide timeline for turning in project in stages
• provide checklists and/or rubrics
• display examples of exemplar work

Programs available to at-risk students are widely available in schools and communities.  Examples include, but are certainly not limited to: Title I programs, early intervention programs, and after school and summer programs (Slavin, 2015).  Title I provides federal money to school to implement programs for at-risk students.  Examples of Title I programs are Head Start, migrant education, and summer programs.  Early intervention programs use various learning programs geared towards remediating students in order to prevent retention or widening of learning gaps.  There are numerous after school and summer programs available to students to help students who are behind academically.  After school programs provide homework help and additional academic support.  Summer programs, such as summer school, help prevent the loss of skills over the summer due to extended practice and instruction during the summer months.

Students are technology wizzes these days.  They are attracted to anything electronic; therefore, it would seem wise to incorporate what they love into instruction.  There are numerous ways this can be achieved even when resources are scarce.  Most students have some type of cell phone, tablet, or other wireless device.  Many schools now participate in BYOT (bring your own technology) to school.  This can be a distraction, for sure; however, if teachers play their cards right, they can use this as an advantage.  There are apps that teachers can use to check for student understanding; students simply login to the app and post answers to the questions.  Teachers can also provide study guides, videos, and interactive study materials that students can access 24/7.  In addition to cell phones, tablets, etc., teachers use computers, interactive white boards, and electronic response devices (CPS clickers).  Students can use technology to create projects and assignments.  Teachers can also use technology to track student data and determine appropriate interventions.  Some schools are migrating to online learning as most colleges are currently doing.  Students can access material, take assessments, and complete assignments while also collaborating with other students using programs such as D2L.

Reflection:  Students are very diverse learners.  It is up to teachers to determine how best to address and meet student needs in the classroom.  Grouping students according to their ability level certainly has advantages; however, it is imperative that teachers be careful not to label the same five students as the red birds and the same five students as the buzzards.  In my experience, it is helpful to have flexible groups and push students to high standards of performance. 

Differentiated instruction is something that tends to come natural to most teachers.  We often differentiate without even realizing that we are doing so.  Providing choices and taking student interests into account are ways to make effective decisions regarding adjusting instruction for diverse learners.  It is important to remember that differentiated instruction is not just for at-risk students; higher level students require differentiation as well.

In my school system, we have numerous programs available to at-risk students.  Some of the favored include the Boys and Girls Club, the YMCA’s after school program, migrant education, and summer school.  These programs are extremely beneficial not only for students’ academic progress, but also their social and emotional well-being.  Mentoring programs through the YMCA are also utilized in our system.  The mentors are invaluable for increasing student motivation and self-efficacy. 

Technology in instruction is great fun for me.  I have been to several workshops and conferences this summer that have provided me with new and fun ways to engage my students through the use of technology.  I believe that we must teach the way students learn, and if using cell phones and tablets in class to increase engagement and motivation will work, I am all in.

References: 

Logan, B. (2011).  Examining differentiated instruction: Teachers respond.  Research in  

     Higher Education Journal, 1-14.  Retrieved from:

     http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1068803.pdf

Slavin, R. E. (2015).  Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice.  Boston, MA: Pearson

     Education.