Differentiation and Coherent Instruction

4.3 Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction

During assessment review, I use what are called “review stations.” In this activity, students rotate through 4 stations, where they are given a review sheet addressing part of the unit of the assessment. They have approximately 10 minutes at each station.

“Review Stations” reaches a wide range of students for various reasons. If a student thoroughly understands the content at a certain station, they can practice it to solidify understanding. If a student is unsure about that same content, they can ask their fellow students for support or they can ask me for additional support. For all students, the things they understand or are confused on may be different so the group’s dynamic of stronger versus less strong will change at each station, allowing all students the chance to contribute. The short exposure to each topic reflects the idea of “Cognitive Load Theory” so as to not overload a student’s cognition with any one topic and to provide a plethora of instructional strategies. In this case, students get a feel for what they have a grasp on versus where they need more practice. We do not do review stations for every assessment so as to not bore students with the design of the activity. By the end of the activity, students have a 4-page review packet that they can utilize while preparing for their assessment. If I just provided them with this packet, students would get hung up on the first page or two and may not reach the later pages and their material.

Creating movement from station to station allows students to re-engage every 10 minutes and this pace keeps students engaged to get the maximum amount of work done in the 10 minutes they have. I have a student with anxiety and this kind of activity tends to be a trigger for her. She has the option to sit at a table away from the chaos of review stations and work independently if she begins to feel overwhelmed.The design of my classroom is below, which points out where students are rotating and where this student can go to opt out of the high social interaction. I was also able to provide more individual support for an underperforming student discreetly and minimize potential embarrassment. Since the students are constantly moving around and engaged in their work, they may not realize if I spend more time with a certain student.

I would use this activity in the future because I saw the level of engagement of my students increased dramatically and I was able to provide additional support to specific students (underperforming, behavioral anxiety, etc.). I will need to be more aware of my timing in the future because 10 minutes went by quickly when I got involved supporting students at any one station.

Nature Vs. Nurture in Education

H1 – Honor student diversity and development

Throughout my experience with both psychology as an undergraduate student and my new experience with education as a graduate student, human development has been a large part of my educational endeavors. Principle H1 addresses this explicitly saying that educators should honor student diversity and development. One of the most prominent debates in both fields is that of Nature vs. Nurture.

Pressely and McCormick (2007) bring up the argument that nature can only be taken advantage of if it is nurtured as well. I feel this is especially true in the education field. As educators we must take what is given to us (our student’s predisposed genetic build up) and foster and teach them various skills to allow them to be even more successful in life.

With this perspective, that nature and nurture are in part, equalities, as an educator this needs to be kept in mind. I cannot dismiss students based on learning disabilities that they had no choice of being gifted with and students that were genetically gifted should not receive the majority of my attention solely because they are more advanced. This dynamic of student abilities and skills will provide me a challenge to accommodate each student and their needs whether it is because they are at an advantage or a disadvantage.

Pressely, M., & McCormick, C. B. (2007). Child and adolescent development for educators. New York, NY: Guilford Press

Special Education: Accommodations vs. Special Treatment

H2 – Honor student access to content material.

Special Education and it’s accompanying debate correlates highly with providing the most accessible education for students if they happen to have various impairments or disabilities. Both sides of the “Special Education” debate provide valid evidence for whether separation or inclusion in mainstream education for disabled students is the right way to go. While separation of disabled students may help with their immediate academic performance, in the long run, they may or may not have been provided the resources to succeed in the mainstream society that they live in. Similarly, abandoning students in regular education classes without any resources to accommodate their disability will lead to academic failure. I believe that keeping students in regular ed. classes is valuable for social and academic growth so long as appropriate accommodations are provided for the students who require them.

In reading Evans’ chapter regarding the special education debate, the example of eyeglasses as an accommodation stood out to me (2008). As educators we need to see that accommodations are not “special treatment” for students. They merely serve to improve or change how students access academic material. For special education students the barrier is that they are not able to access information in the same way as many other students. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act states that students will receive an education in the “least restrictive environment” (1974). By working to alleviate certain restrictions, we can unleash the full potential of all of our students and provide them the thorough education that they deserve. Teachers need to accommodate this idea and not feel that special education students are a burden or not smart enough to be in their class. In most cases they are smart enough when they are able to access information in a useful way to them.

Evans, D. (2008). Issue 17. Is the Practice of Providing Accommodations to Children in             Special Education a Good Idea? In Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Teaching and             Educational Practice (Third ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (1974). Scheuerman. R. EDU 6989 Session 3 outline. Retrieved from https://mountainlightschool.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/issues-session-3a-special-ed.pdf