2.5 Differentiation
Candidates model and facilitate the design and implementation of technology-enhanced learning experiences making appropriate use of differentiation, including adjusting content, process, product, and learning environment based upon an analysis of learner characteristics, including readiness levels, interests, and personal goals. (PSC 2.5/ISTE 2e)
Artifact: Mathematics remediation sessions designed for and delivered to English Language Learners
Reflection:
Standard 2.5 includes the use of differentiation to reach diverse learners. My most aligned field experience from the instructional technology program was the English Language Learner experience that I completed in ITEC 7430, Internet Tools in the Classroom, so I chose that experience as my artifact for this standard. For this artifact, I was able to develop a plan that I used for ELL students who were in a CRCT tutoring and remediation class that I taught at my school.
The artifact that I chose dealt with using the proper methods for teaching students with language needs. In the case of this experience, I worked with two different English Language Learners at two different levels of language acquisition. To that end, the first step in my work with the students was to identify the diverse needs of both students. I determined that both students had weaknesses in their acquisition of the vocabulary involved in mathematics. Luckily, many of the other students in the class demonstrated similar weaknesses, and I was able to design some strategies for the ELL students that could be used for the other students as well.
In the lesson that I designed, I used technology in the form of the Smart Board in my classroom to introduce mathematical concepts using pictures. I set up a matching game in which a term was situated in the center of the screen and students moved pictures underneath it that described that term. Students themselves then used technology by working on netbook computers to use Microsoft Powerpoint to create an interactive one-page Frayer model that included a term, a picture of that term, and descriptions of examples and non-examples of the term. Through these activities, students learned more about the terminology used in mathematics.
Throughout the remediation course, students were also quizzed on an informal basis on the terminology that they were learning. During these quizzes, we employed a system in which students were allowed to respond with pictures or another means rather than writing their answers in longhand. This allowed for students to respond in any method they felt comfortable with.
During the lesson included in this artifact, the main lesson that I learned was for differentiation to work well, a teacher has to fully understand the needs of his or her students. In this case, while I eventually learned what my students needed, I did not set out to find their needs immediately. To that end, I wasted a decent amount of the limited time that I was afforded with the students on learning their needs including their preferred learning styles and their strengths and weaknesses.
This artifact mainly impacted the overall student achievement of the students involved. The students involved in my remediation class were mostly struggling learners, and the class in general was meant to provide them with a better chance to succeed on the state standardized test as well as in the classroom. The success of the students in the class and of the artifact could be traced to their classroom performance as well as their performance on the CRCT. In that case, the results were mixed as both students passed their math classes. However, one of the ELL students did not meet standards on the CRCT while the other exceeded standards.
Standard 2.5 includes the use of differentiation to reach diverse learners. My most aligned field experience from the instructional technology program was the English Language Learner experience that I completed in ITEC 7430, Internet Tools in the Classroom, so I chose that experience as my artifact for this standard. For this artifact, I was able to develop a plan that I used for ELL students who were in a CRCT tutoring and remediation class that I taught at my school.
The artifact that I chose dealt with using the proper methods for teaching students with language needs. In the case of this experience, I worked with two different English Language Learners at two different levels of language acquisition. To that end, the first step in my work with the students was to identify the diverse needs of both students. I determined that both students had weaknesses in their acquisition of the vocabulary involved in mathematics. Luckily, many of the other students in the class demonstrated similar weaknesses, and I was able to design some strategies for the ELL students that could be used for the other students as well.
In the lesson that I designed, I used technology in the form of the Smart Board in my classroom to introduce mathematical concepts using pictures. I set up a matching game in which a term was situated in the center of the screen and students moved pictures underneath it that described that term. Students themselves then used technology by working on netbook computers to use Microsoft Powerpoint to create an interactive one-page Frayer model that included a term, a picture of that term, and descriptions of examples and non-examples of the term. Through these activities, students learned more about the terminology used in mathematics.
Throughout the remediation course, students were also quizzed on an informal basis on the terminology that they were learning. During these quizzes, we employed a system in which students were allowed to respond with pictures or another means rather than writing their answers in longhand. This allowed for students to respond in any method they felt comfortable with.
During the lesson included in this artifact, the main lesson that I learned was for differentiation to work well, a teacher has to fully understand the needs of his or her students. In this case, while I eventually learned what my students needed, I did not set out to find their needs immediately. To that end, I wasted a decent amount of the limited time that I was afforded with the students on learning their needs including their preferred learning styles and their strengths and weaknesses.
This artifact mainly impacted the overall student achievement of the students involved. The students involved in my remediation class were mostly struggling learners, and the class in general was meant to provide them with a better chance to succeed on the state standardized test as well as in the classroom. The success of the students in the class and of the artifact could be traced to their classroom performance as well as their performance on the CRCT. In that case, the results were mixed as both students passed their math classes. However, one of the ELL students did not meet standards on the CRCT while the other exceeded standards.