Meeting Learning Outcomes For All Students

INTRODUCTION

In any set of individuals there will be variation (Gershon, 2018) and a classroom full of students is no exception. From experience this variation tends to fall into 3 categories the high achievers, those meeting their target grade and coasting and the low achievers, which could include Special Education Needs and Disability (SEND) students. As it’s the role of the teacher to ensure that all students make progress in their subject, teachers must find a way to structure their lessons to ensure all pupils understand the content covered but also to be able to set different levels of work to ensure students not only understand the work but also to allow those high achieving students the chance to meet their target grade. This can be achieved by the process of differentiation.

There are many different definitions for differentiation. Gershon (2018) states that ‘differentiation in the classroom means anything which a teacher does which helps in personalising learning’. Rogers (2007) stated that ‘Differentiation can be referred to as an educational philosophy that requires teachers to tailor their learning, teaching and assessment whilst adjusting the curriculum to the needs of children with SEN rather than expecting pupils to fit the existing curriculum’ (as cited by Teacher Training Resource Bank, 2010). Although the definitions vary, they all share a general theme of the ability to vary the delivery of teaching and resources to cover the needs of all students.

From personal experience, especially as a trainee teacher, you are told in your training year that you must differentiate. I have been told constantly that I must differentiate and from my lesson observations I am always asked ‘have I differentiated?’ However I haven’t properly been told how to differentiate and therefore it is a difficult task to achieve in your practice if you don’t know what you’ve been asked to do. Gershon (2018) states that during a teacher trainer’s training period, aspiring teachers are told to differentiate without being given clear guidance on what it is in practice. From my personal experience and the comment from Gershon, It is important that during a teachers training year, covering what differentiation is and how it can be achieved is an important part of the training.

It is essential that teachers are told why differentiation must be used as well as what it means. Gershon (2018) states that teachers must use differentiation to ensure they fulfil their duty to help students make progress. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) states that differentiation is vital as students learn at different rates and in different ways. From reviewing literature and from experience, differentiation is necessary to ensure all students make progress.

When thinking about differentiation, I always thought about SEND students and how I would plan my lessons around their learning difficulty. But after reading literature and carrying out observations of other teachers it is evident that differentiation is just as important for the more and less able students and not just for SEND students. Teacher Training Resource Bank (2010) stated that differentiation is complex and requires teachers to think about the impact of their learning on children including those with SEND. Gershon (2018) states that differentiation can include sentence starters for those struggling with extended writing to begin their work but also using super extension questions which can stretch and challenge those more able students. This highlights the fact that differentiation isn’t just about meeting the needs of SEND students, which is important, but also to ensure those lower able students understand the content covered and to stretch and challenge those higher achieving students.

Speaking to other teachers and by reading articles in the news, it’s suggested that teachers tend to favour the higher achievers and spend less time on those students that require more help. Hoehn (1954) stated that a number of literature reviews have found that teachers behave more favourably towards the high status students compared to the low status students. Teachers must be careful with this, as although it’s easy to spend more time with those high achievers as they are normally the ones that ask all the questions and seek help outside of lessons, teachers must spend the same amount of time, if not more, with those low achieving students in order for them to meet their target grades.

DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH PLANNING

Vickerman (2007) states that teachers should seek to meet the needs of children with SEN by adopting varied approaches to learning, teaching and assessment (as cited by Teacher Training Resource Bank, 2010). Although Vickerman states that this should be done to SEN students, the same can be said for those high and low achieving students. In order to meet the needs of all these children, through differentiation, effective planning of lessons has to take place.

Before differentiation can take place, the teacher must identify the academic needs of all students. These can involve using the academic results of students in the class. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) states that the use of regular formative assessment can be used to evaluate where students are in their learning and to use this information to adapt the teaching to their needs. From my personal experience this is an important tool in my practice. After every topic, the classes I teach complete an end of topic test and I will use this data to assess the students’ progress. This will determine whether the students require extra help during subsequent lessons or if some students need to be furthered challenged academically.

In order for a teacher to differentiate effectively, not only does the teacher need to analyse the academic marks but they also need to be aware of the academic needs of certain pupils. Teachers need to be aware of SEND students, their needs and to be able to cater for them during lessons. Resourced (2017) suggests that feedback allows teachers to adapt their teaching methods according to the pupil’s needs and learning conditions. From experience and observations of teachers it is evident that a good relation with the Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator (SENCO) is key in order to meet the demands of all your students. Not only this but looking at the SEN information on the school system can help the teacher meet the needs of the students. In my experience this is key as some students in the school I work at suffer from visual stress and require different coloured paper, so it is essential that I know this when planning for lessons so that they get the correctly coloured paper hand-outs. Other examples in my own experience include students that require information to be delivered in no more than 3 key points, something I would not have known if I didn’t check the SEN student information. This information is essential to meet the demands of the students I teach and whilst it doesn’t ensure success it gives the students the best chance to achieve what they are capable of.

In order to differentiate effectively, it is imperative that the teacher has a good relationship with the students, but also knows the students very well, otherwise they do not know the recent academic progress or the academic needs of that student, which of course differs for every student. Teacher Training Resource Bank (2010) states that differentiation requires teachers to recognise that:

· All learners are different and are capable of some achievement

· Every class is a mixed ability group

· Knowing individual pupils well is essential to good differentiation

From personal experience it is clear that differentiation is a lot more than just one word and it can be split into many different sections. Gershon (2018) divided differentiation into five different categories:

1. Things the teacher can do.

2. Things you can ask students to do or use

3. Activities

4. Questioning

5. Words and writing.

These five categories of differentiation can be linked in to my practice. Things the teacher can do is very vague as the teacher can do a lot. Not only this but the things the teacher can do links in with the other four points so personally I think this point made by Gershon could be better put across. However the aim of differentiation is so every student in the class, regardless of ability and learning difficulties, makes progress and the last three points made by Gershon, activities, questioning and words and writing, are valid methods of differentiation. Personally the method I use the most is selective questioning as it is the method of differentiation that requires the least amount of planning short term and it is an effective way of ensuring that all students are understanding the content covered.

With regards to what the teacher can do, this can be linked in with all of the other points put across by Gershon. Teacher Training Resource Bank (2010) stated that differentiation in publications refer to three factors that I believe link in with what the teacher can do as stated by Gershon. These are:

1. Task

2. Outcome

3. Support

Teachers can involve different tasks dependant on the ability of the pupils in the group and the number and age of the students in the group. From my experience this is a very effective method of differentiation especially in the younger students, mainly because they are very enthusiastic and will see it as a competition. Although an effective method it does require the most planning and cannot always be achieved fully. For me, Outcome can involve setting open ended tasks which allow pupil responses at different levels. This is a method of differentiation that I use the least mainly because of the subject taught. Chemistry involves working in workbooks, making it very hard to post open ended tasks. Support involves assisting pupils who need more help. This is the method I use the most out of the three. As I have now had almost 2 terms with my classes who have sat multiple tests, I now have a good idea about the abilities of all the pupils and their progress in my classes so can easily identify those who need additional help.

Current literature on differentiation states many different strategies that can be used in the planning by teachers that can improve differentiation. Some of these strategies I have used in my own practice and have observed in other teachers, with a varied success rate. This is dependent on the class and the delivery styles from the teacher, with teacher effectiveness being the main determinant of student progress (W.L.Sanders and Horn, 1998) (as cited by Van Tassel-Baska, 2012).

One of these methods of differentiation, suggested by The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) is to use one worksheet with progressively more difficult tasks. This article mentions that teachers should try to consider a single worksheet to reduce time taken in preparation by the teacher but also a way to reduce social implications. This has been evident in my experience as when handing out differentiated sheets, some student’s question why they have a different sheet to others and sometimes notice that their sheet is easier so become demoralised and can be mocked by their peers, if not managed effectively by the teacher. However there are possible social implications with the singular sheet with progressively harder questions. Resourced (2017) suggests that equally giving students questions that are above their academic level which they might not be able to answer can also be equally as demoralising as giving the student a different sheet. This in my opinion highlights the need for the students to be put in sets according to academic ability, so that all students in a class can have the same sheet. Different sets may have different sheets depending on the academic level of the students. I believe this will reduce the social implications of giving different sheets to different pupils in the same class.

A common method of differentiation from reading current literature is a ‘flexible learning pace’ in the classroom to allow students to complete work at their own pace. Faster learners are held up by the pace of their peers however slower workers feel rushed and therefore reduce the capacity to learn as they just want to complete the work. Resourced (2017) suggest that if a ‘flexible learning pace’ is implemented in the classroom, then the more able students can be given an extension task so that others can complete the tasks at a more comfortable speed. This is something I can definitely implement into my practice as I feel sometimes students will either look at someone else’s answers or just write down anything as they feel pressure because they are the only student that has not completed the task. Although this task seems good to ensure that all students understand the content covered, when I have tried to use extension tasks in my practice, those students who have finished the first task start to relax and do not answer the extension task. However the Highly Effective Teacher (2018) stated that additional work should be exciting and stimulating, this would remove my problem of students not completing the additional work as they would enjoy doing it.

Resourced (2017) also suggests the use of digital resources to highlight a skill in students with less academic ability whilst others might work more effectively with non-traditional resources. From observations I have seen that have used digital resources, it has worked really well. Some students really relished the opportunity, however others didn’t really want to see themselves on video. In my opinion I believe that this resource’s success will depend on the subject taught. My subject is science and the opportunity to use digital resources isn’t really viable, however there are opportunities to do so, such as recording the students completing an experiment so that they can watch it again during revision. However this requires extensive planning to order the camera’s but also to ensure that all the students give consent to get recorded. Peetsma (2001) suggested using digital resources in a slightly different way and that teachers should video record their lessons and make it accessible for students so that they can watch the lesson again at home. I believe this method has a lot of positives in that it gives students an opportunity to go over certain topics they did not understand which they might not have asked for help for various reasons but also gives those students who missed the lesson a chance to catch up. However I do think certain students might not pay as much attention in class as they might use watching it again at home as an excuse. This is certainly what I saw from when this strategy was used by my lecturers at University.

Another part of my role is being a sports coach and a large part of my coaching has involved video analysis. I recorded my team playing their fixtures and during their games sessions played certain parts of the video to them so that they can better understand the coaching points. This worked really well as students could not only hear what they could do better but could also see that what they did could be improved. This further enhances my point that methods of delivery depend on the subject taught.

DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH DELIVERY

From experience, planning is a very important part of meeting the demands of all your students. However delivery is as important as sometimes the lesson plans do not go as planned and you have to not only know what the demands of all your pupils are but also how you can differentiate by delivery to further meet the demands of the students. Teacher training resource bank (2010) states that in order to address the full continuum of student’s needs, teachers have to work flexibly and creatively through a range of differentiation strategies for different environments for all students. This I believe can be interpreted as how teachers conduct themselves in the classroom to meet the demands of all the students. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) backs up my point as they state that as well as cognitive performance, psychosocial factors affect those students with learning difficulties who usually are affected by attention and motivation problems due to the negative experiences in learning previously. This highlights how important the delivery of a lesson is. Teachers need to realise that those students with learning difficulties may be low in confidence and that extra time needs to be spent building up their confidence and to be careful in the choice of words when speaking to those students.

From experience and observation of colleagues it is clear that meeting the demands of students is not simply about printing out different coloured paper or additional/easier resources and it’s important to identify that different students learn in different ways and a teacher has to identify this to meet the demands of the students. Gardner (1993) proposed a theory of multiple intelligences where students have different intelligences and that they learn in several different ways. Everest (2003) stated that in an article in the Guardian newspaper, some people like working in books, some like watching videos and others prefer practical work. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) also highlights the importance of identifying the different learning styles of the students in order to meet their learning needs. This is highlighted in one of the hierarchy’s of Blooms Taxonomy. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) states that the ‘applying’ hierarchy is ‘carrying out or using procedure through executing’, which I believe can be linked to the different learning styles of students and how teachers can execute their delivery to accommodate for all of the student’s needs. From experience it is evident that students work better in different lessons due to the resources and style of teaching. As a science teacher I have to perform certain practicals for exams and as the sciences are mainly practical subjects it is important that I use other resources to ensure that all students have their ideal learning environments in order to achieve their potential.

Current literature has suggested different idea’s which teachers can implement in their practice to meet the demands of all their students. Resourced (2017) suggested that group work is a good way for students to learn. The paper suggested that forming mixed ability groups allows high achievers to form a leadership role and also lower ability students can learn from their peers. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) suggests that peer monitoring allows students the opportunity to gain confidence by sharing their expertise with a less able student and sometimes young people can explain concepts to peers in a way that teachers cannot. From my own experience this depends on the class. I have tried this method in my practice and with my older student classes it has been successful with students relishing the chance to take a leadership role however with the younger student classes, students see it as a chance to get distracted and to not speak about the content covered, therefore requires a lot of monitoring from the teacher.

Resourced (2017) suggests that teachers can use vocal explanations to support different academic levels by using targeted questions to different pupils of different learning profiles. This is a strategy I commonly use in my practice as it is a way of stretching the more academic students as well as boosting the confidence of those less able students. I have used this in my practice by looking at the target and attainment grades of the students and identifying the level of the question and asking students based on the level that the student is working at. This has been a very successful method. Resourced (2017) also suggests setting a task with multiple outcomes or different correct answers based on the level of learning. I believe the paper suggested this so when a teacher asks a question to the class and a lower able student answers it, where some of the answer might be correct however it didn’t really answer the question, to allow that as an answer if the level of that student is below the level of the question asked. This is certainly a strategy I would like to implement in my practice more and has been identified as a weakness in my observations, that when I ask a question I am looking for a certain answer and dismissing other valid points because they were not what I was looking for. Although this strategy highlighted by the paper is a good one I think it can be adapted so that you only ask the higher questions to those higher students and don’t accept answers from others as accepting an answer that is wrong might give the student false hope but also might mean other students remember that as the correct answer which could lead to them not understanding the content correctly.

One of the most challenging things I have come across during my teacher training year is not being able to spend enough time with certain students during a lesson. I have identified in the classes I teach, the students that I need to spend more time with in order for them to understand the content covered. However in order to meet the demands of every student I have not been able to spend as much time as I would have liked with these pupils. The Highly Effective Teacher (2018) states that 80% of students are capable of self-directed learning if they are taught how to, giving the teachers time to assist the 20% of students who need additional support. This is something I think I can implement into my practice. If I could spend some additional time ensuring that the majority of students could be able to learn on their own in some situations, I could spend more time with the students that require additional help. However because of mixed ability classes it is unlikely that 80% of the classes I teach would be able to undertake self-directed studying but also because of the subject I teach (Science) there are few opportunities to have lessons that could involve self-directed studying. An example of how I might do this is setting certain pupils to plan their own practicals. I could set the majority of the class, with the help of a worksheet and some guidance, a task to plan their own experiment, giving some extra guidance to some students in the form of key words/hints. This could allow me to work with the 20% of pupils who are not capable of self-directed learning, ensuring that they get the assistance they need to succeed. Even though this is a strategy I could implement into my practice I have to be realistic with the time frame during lessons and realise it is likely to be challenging to spend as much time as I would like with those students that require help. I believe that as long as I finish the lesson with all students knowing more than they did before they arrived then I have succeeded in my role.

CONCLUSION

From reading current literature it is clear that there are several different methods that teachers can use in their practice to support all students, whatever their academic level and learning needs. These methods can involve differentiated sheets with both higher and lower level questions and different types of lessons to cater for all the learning styles students might have. Both of these require effective planning but also good delivery from the teacher. Although all the methods discussed by the literature are valid and do work, from experience it depends on the class, the delivery and the planning of the teacher to ensure that the lesson content is accessible for all students. This shows that in order for the learning outcomes to be successful for all students, a number of different techniques and learning styles need to be delivered.