Reflection on P2

P2 – Practice differentiated instruction.
Teacher-candidates apply principles of differentiated instruction, including theories of language acquisition, stages of language, and academic language development, in the integration of subject matter across the content areas of reading, mathematical, scientific, and aesthetic reasoning. In other words, teacher must adapt and alter their lessons in order to accommodate for the needs of students at all stages of development and learning.

My evidence for this HOPE principle is a math lesson on division. The lesson focused on division number sentences, in an attempt to introduce them to the mathematical concept of division and its relationship to the symbols that represent them. The students in this lesson were read Pat Hutchin’s The Doorbell Rang and discussed the meaning of “equal sharing division”, using cookie cut-out manipulatives to act out equal sharing situations. Division Lesson.

This lesson provides evidence of this HOPE principle because of the supports and modifications included in the lesson to tend to my students’ learning needs. First, the learning target was reviewed and analyzed at the lesson’s onset, during which we discussed the key vocabulary words necessary for the lesson’s content. Additionally, I modeled writing the key vocabulary in a math dictionary, which the students repeated in their own math dictionary. I also prepared additional challenges and supports based upon my individual students’ needs during a group activity, in which students were dividing cookie-cut outs and writing an equation to represent this. I prepared additional tasks for groups that finished early, asking them to split up their cookies in alternate ways, thereby representing them with different equations. However, I also prepared hint cards for students who needed additional support writing the division number sentences. Though we had written number sentence frames in our math dictionaries, I also wrote out number sentence frames for students who needed additional support. This proved to be very beneficial to engage students in the lesson who otherwise may have been stuck.

This lesson-planning process was an excellent exercise in adapting and providing support for learners who needed it. Most significantly, I learned how key intentionality and devotion are to preparing for a successful lesson for my particular class. Therefore, planning must integrate sufficient time to account for this part of the process.   I also realized how different supports look, depending on which group of students we encounter. While planning “supports” for hypothetical students in coursework was beneficial, the application of these theories look quite different when using them an actual heterogeneous mix of varying academic needs and personalities. This aspect of planning and instruction also has drastic implications on the students. Had I not prepared higher level tasks and supports for my students, half the class would have mentally vacated the lesson, and thereby, would not have learned anything. Differentiation, therefore, is essential in order for learning to take place.

This lesson is only a small representation of differentiation necessities and strategies in the classroom. In order to take further steps to improve my familiarity and mastery of this HOPE principle, I hope to come up with a more consistent means for a word bank for math in my classroom. While students have their math dictionaries to reference for academic terms, a math bank would provide a more visual, consistent resource for students who need it. Additionally, I will need additional practice tending to my students needs accurately. Though I continually aim for providing developmental approximations of students learning, I will need to continue to become familiar with my students and their capabilities in order to best serve their needs.

 

Intervention Plan Reflection (P1 Reflection)

P1 – Practice intentional inquiry and planning for instruction.
Teacher-candidates plan and/or adapt standards-based curricula that are personalized to the diverse needs of each student.

The diverse needs of students demands different levels of intervention. It is the teacher’s responsibility to ensure that students receive enough support to prepare them their for their future academic and professional lives.

This Intervention Plan is a hypothetical example of the type of differentiation necessary for ensuring student success. This intervention plan is based off of the assessment data of a student in my internship classroom who is a below grade level reader. A presentation of his assessment results, an interpretation of the data, and the recommended steps for improvement based on this data are outlined in the plan.

This plan was informed by the interpretation of the students’ needs and the research-based practices that support them. Personalization is only effective when it is based on an accurate analysis of assessment data. Without sound information on the students’ strengths and weaknesses, students are at the mercy of the dangers of assumptions and variability. Therefore, the first step in crafting this intervention plan was an evaluation of verifiable data. The subsequent step was taking research-based steps to address the findings. Much of this intervention was informed by Teaching Struggling and At-Risk Readers, which details what works for designing reading instruction for struggling readers. The core tenets of this book, and as a result, this plan, are increased time, systematic and explicit instruction, and ample opportunity for practice and feedback.

As a result of this plan, I became acquainted with the steps needed to design an intervention for a struggling reader. As stated, effective interventions must be based on the specific needs of the student, which can only be reliably determined through an evaluation of sound assessment data. Additionally, this task provided a clearer picture of what reading instruction entails in order to fill gaps in reading success as quickly as possible. The implications of these steps on student learning are the reason their necessity. When intervention is based on student needs and research-based practice, variability and false assumptions are minimized. A decrease in student variability increases the likelihood that students succeed.

In the future, I plan to take increasingly more steps to individualize instruction for various students’ needs. While individual plans are an important component, it will also be necessary to include intentional planning for whole class instruction. More planning to accommodate the range of students needs in the classroom will be part of my future teaching.