In education, it is always important to consider the whole student, including their personal background, before making referrals for special education services. This holds true for English Language Learners as well. Just like general education students, the success or failure of these children is often dependent upon more than simple aptitude. Do the students have supportive parents? What language is spoken at home? Is English acquisition important to the child? How much experience does the child have reading and writing in his or her native language? How long did they live in their home country? The answers to these questions certainly affect how successful an English Language Learner will be.
In my six years as a teacher, I have had the opportunity to work with six English Language Learners. Four of which were from Mexico, one was from the Philippines, and one was from Russia. Each student had unique needs and circumstances, but none were evaluated for learning disabilities. All of the students received extra help with their language in one form or another, but not under the realm of special education (none of them had IEPs). Most recently I've worked with a little girl from Russia. She moved to Michigan about five years ago (I taught her two years ago in third grade and again this year for 5th grade). We do not offer special education services at our school, but she has gotten extra help through Title I. Even if we did have special education, I don't believe it would be beneficial to her because she excels in so many things. She struggles with her reading, writing, and spelling, but has made immense growth in the past 5 years. I believe the problem of misdiagnosis occur both ways - those who are learning disabled go undiagnosed, while some who are not learning disabled are labeled as such. I personally have never recommended an ELL student for special education evaluation based on low achievement, the students I worked with showed great progress and responded well to the strategies that I used with them within my own classroom so I did not feel that it was necessary to make referrals. I can see how this would happen though. According to an article about assessing ELLs for learning disabilities, many students are actually referred to special education because of “socioeconomic, linguistic and cultural factors rather than psychoeducational factors” (Geva, 2000, p. 14). When you take into account all that factors that effect student learning, it is easy to see what a proper diagnosis can be difficult. With that in mind, it is also important to remember that some ELLs DO have learning disabilities. I think that many teachers, perhaps myself included, often attribute difficulties in language acquisition to the fact that the student is not a native English speaker. Because of this, ELLs may be given more leeway, or simply allowed to struggle with the idea that as they become more proficient in English, their overall achievement will improve. In evaluating ELLs for special education, we need to take more into account than the native language of a student. Just because a student is not a native English speaker, does not mean that they have a learning disability, nor should we use their native language as an excusable reason for failure. Geva, E. (2000). Issues in the Assessment of Reading Disabilities in L2 Children—Beliefs and Research Evidence.Dyslexia, 6(1), 14. Coming from a poor background myself and relying on free school lunches throughout my school career, the correlation between socioeconomic status and reading success is especially intriguing to me. I have always loved reading and learning, so I have often thought about how I was able to overcome the obstacles that leave so many children struggling to excel. One explanation I have for this is the fact that I was raised in a home with both of my parents. Children receiving free or reduced lunches, at least in my experience as a teacher, tend to come from single parent homes. This is not always the case of course, but frequently enough to make a generalization. The fact that these children do not have both parents at home may be a contributing factor to the lack of vocabulary acquisition in low income students. Another explanation for the disparity between free and reduced students and non-free and reduced is the attitude in the home towards education. Typically people in low paying jobs do not have a higher level of education, while people with higher paying jobs typically have at least some college or trade school experience (US Department of Education). People who are willing to seek out higher education and end up earning higher paying jobs value education and pass this viewpoint onto their children.
While I have only been teaching for six years, I have been able to have two very diverse experiences, allowing me to work with a wide variety of learners. My first experience was in rural South Carolina. I worked as a third grade teacher in a failing Title I school. Poverty was a huge problem and most students came from broken homes. Reading and writing were not priorities, survival was. Unsurprisingly, the incoming third graders lacked the skills you would expect from the average incoming third graders. Just as mentioned in the Torgesen piece, the students often came into my class with a negative attitude towards reading, typically because reading was hard for them and they had not been given ample time to practice the skills needed. The other factors mentioned, including fewer opportunities to acquire a richer vocabulary, fewer chances to improve reading comprehension, and less time to practice reading, were all factors that had to be taken into account when planning literacy instruction in my class. In reading the list, it was almost as if someone was observing the students with which I worked! To help the struggling linguists, I adopted a workshop approach for both reading and writing instruction, allowing me to work in small groups and focus on the specific needs of my students. I found that not only did this help fill in the gaps with reading comprehension and vocabulary, but it also gave the students ample time to practice the specific skills that we worked on since they were to read independently or with partners while I worked with the small groups. While this approach did provide improvements for most of the students, most where still not performing at grade level, likely because by the time a student reaches third grade, reading habits have already been established. Torgensen references several studies in his article that point to the idea that those who struggle to read in first grade stay that way meaning that interventions in third grade are often too little, too late. In my situation, the school system did identify students needing extra help early in their educational careers, but due to the shear number of students in need, many students, in my opinion, were overlooked. Providing special education for that many students would most certainly be cost prohibitive due to the need for smaller classes and increased numbers of teachers and aids. In situations like this, where most of the students in the school could probably qualify for special education services of some kind, how are we as educators supposed to make these students successful? In my current job, I teach upper elementary language arts and science at a private school. Most of the students are generally good readers, but there are always those students who find reading and writing more laborious than others. After this week's readings, especially the article by Hock et al, I am left wondering what I can do as an educator to help students that still struggle to read when they reach the upper elementary grades. According to the articles, early intervention is key. That seems fairly obvious. To me, even more than knowing the value of early intervention is knowing what to do with students that do not receive those interventions. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (n.d.). Income of young adults. Retrieved from website: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77 Over the years, legislation has greatly changed the face of education in the United States, especially in terms of literacy. NCLB in particular focuses specifically on improving reading and language in its Reading First initiative. In addition to focusing on early interventions, it also requires the use of scientifically based reading research (SBRR). What that means for teachers and students is that the materials being provided by publishers has to use SBRR. This provides a higher quality product with which educators can teach. Instead of providing materials that seem good, the publishers need to have data to back up their products. In addition to higher standards for literacy materials, more focus is being placed upon early intervention. According to the reading, IDEA allows districts to spend up to 15% of their budget on early intervention, meaning that many disabilities can be prevented or minimized before the effects become lasting. While not perfect, the legislation that has been put in place has served to focus the educational communities attention on literacy while also providing an equal education for students of all abilities.
When I started teaching in 2008, I worked as a third grade teacher in rural South Carolina. During my time there, I used the South Carolina state standards to guide my language arts instructions. My only previous experience with standards were the Michigan GLCE's, so I was actually happy with the standards with which I was expected to work. They were specific enough that I knew exactly what needed to be taught, but also not so extensive that I felt overwhelmed. This allowed me to teach a few things at a deeper level than I would have been able to with the GLCE's, where I felt I need to gloss over certain areas in order to focus on the needs of the class with which I did my student teaching. In 2011, I relocated to accept my current job at a private school in Michigan, again teaching third grade. This school had made the transition from GLCE's to CCSS, so I was expected to follow the new standards. Upon reviewing the CCSS, I actually really liked them. They were similar to the standards that I used in South Carolina in that they allowed me to teach the content more deeply than with the GLCE's. I still use the CCSS and I have to say that I do not have a complaint about them. I feel like they do a good job of guiding my instruction without mandating the exact way the material needs to be taught. I can focus on the needs of my students and still fulfill the requirements of the standards. To be fair, however, I have had very little experience using the CCSS with special needs and ESL students. I work at a parochial school that does not have the funds to support special education services, so those students typically choose to go to the public school. If I were teaching students with special needs, I might feel differently about the standards. On paper, I think that the RtI model is an excellent way to address students with learning disabilities. If a problem can be solved in the general education classroom, then by all means, it should be. Why would you start with intensive interventions if the problem can be solved within the confines of the general classroom? It makes sense to use the continuum of increasing levels of intensity until a solution can be found. When implemented properly, I am sure that the RtI model would be extremely effective. The problem, in my experience at least, is that districts have not been properly trained in how to use the RtI model. In both of the schools in which I have worked, the success or failure has been left up to the individual classroom teachers who have not been trained in how to manage RtI. In both cases, I was essentially presented with a pyramid chart and told to "do RtI". It almost seems that in order to be effective, there needs to be someone in charge of managing RtI and following up with teachers and support personnel to ensure that interventions are taking place According to Forman and Nixon, academic skills, experience, content knowledge, and professional development are all factors that contribute to the quality of a teacher. While important, I feel like even teachers who are deficient in one of the areas listed can still be successful if given the proper support within their school and the proper attitude towards teaching. Unfortunately, not all teachers have that support or demeanor. More likely, the quality of a teacher does have an effect on student learning. In the article, Forman and Nixon explain that disadvantaged schools are less likely to have high quality teachers. To me, this is essentially a double-whammy for those schools. They are starting with a tougher demographic, plus they lack the teachers needed to overcome the deficiency. Hopefully the requirements of NCLB for highly qualified teachers will help to shrink the gap. Policy Brief
Thoughts on CubanWhat do you make of Cuban’s definition of useful educational technology? Historically, I feel that Cuban's definition of educational technology is spot on. From the early foundations of education, teachers have made creative use of the resources available to them in order to provide a more meaningful education for their pupils. Before formal schooling, students were taught trades at home or through apprenticeships. You can be sure that the education was not done strictly by lecturing. In order to teach someone to farm, they would be taken out in the fields and shown the tools and methods to be a successful farmer. Early scholars relied heavily on memorization. While memorization was a key tool in learning through much of human history, teachers and pupils eventually learned that using the written word to record information was also valuable in learning, leading to the advent of scrolls and books recording what was known about the world.
Cuban's definition would also fit the current views towards educational technology, specificially when you focus on the keys words "efficient" and "stimulating". Pencil and paper are rarely the most efficient and stimulating ways to teach students in the 21st century classroom. We as educators now need to focus on finding the tools to engage students who are used to instant gratification and an entertainment centered culture. In addition, they may not be as motivated to learn as previous generations. Anything they want to know is at their fingertips in the form of smartphones and the internet, so the idea of memorizing and interalizing information may seem illogical to many students. In order to reach these students, we need to be engaging and challenge the students intellectually, a task made easier by the effective use of technology in our classes. For example, my 4th graders started blogging this year. In their blogs, they reflect upon the ideas learned in our science class that week. In previous years, this would have taken place in their science notebooks. By simply changing the method through which the students presented their ideas, I was able to elicit more thoughtful responses and allow for students to go above and beyond the normal requirements. Normally, the students would write their response and be done. Now, with the blogs, students are searching out pictures and videos to add to their posts, spend more time editting since they will be reading and commenting on each other's posts, and are genuinely more invested in the activity than when the response was written in a notebook. Instructor FeedbackI wonder if you mean "promoting" reading comprehension? And I might add "short term effects" to your question as well. Long-term might be hard to measure, as this is usually at least 6-12 months after discontinuing the use of a specific intervention. Reflection of Online LearningIn creating my online course, I tried to keep things simple. As a full time classroom teacher, I understand the importance of effectively using the time that I have, both in terms of planning as well as instruction. Rather than starting from scratch, I modeled my course after my actual classroom model of instruction. My science class operates under a workshop model, so I continued that throughout my online course. I’ve included both in-class and computer-supported cooperative learning elements in addition to hands-on learning activities. I made use of many ready-made materials to cut down on planning time. To maximize learning time, I also included reading and writing elements, allowing for cross curricular learning. When thinking about the theoretical foundations of the course, I came across an article describing three perspectives about learning. These perspectives, the associationist/empiricist perspective, the cognitive perspective, and the situative perspective are all very different, but in my opinion, are all valid in terms of assuring learning. By using the blended model of online learning, I am able to hit all three of these categories. The first perspective, the associationist view, focuses on the idea of learning being an activity. Students learn skills, make connections, and create patterns in order to learn. This is addressed in my classroom model by the use of hands-on activities in which the students learn skills, such as measuring. They can also make generalities and connections through the use of the online and hands on labs. The cognitive perspective, on the other hand, views learning as a way of achieving understanding. This is the ultimate goal of my course and is supported by the use of cross curricular teaching. Students are also presented with information in a variety of formats. At the end of the lesson, students are assessed for their level of understanding using a brief constructed response. The final perspective, the situative perspective, focuses on learning as a social practice. The workshop model in itself is a perfect means of supporting learning through the use of socialization, but the addition of online learning takes this to a new level. In addition to working together in their stations, students also collaborate online through the use of blogging and comments. When I initially started this project, I had a much smaller scale idea in mind. Upon starting, however, I realized that a simple five page website would not cut it. Online courses need to have some serious depth to be valuable! I honestly did not have many other pitfalls in the design of my course, but I think that is due to the fact that the course is modeled after my actual classroom practices. I did not set out to reinvent the wheel; I simply wanted to take what I already do and adapt it to an online format which I think helped to make this much more manageable. CEP 820 LinksInstructor FeedbackGeneral Notes: Areas of focus copied from DN: I chose student self assessments as a focus because I feel like it is so important for students to not only think about the concepts they’ve learned, but also about how well they think they’ve learned those concepts. It is something that I haven’t incorporated much so far, so there is room for growth in that area. Dearest Colleagues, In a course I’m taking through Michigan State University, I have been learning about educational research and doing some of my own. In order to help improve your own instruction, I would like to urge you to do a little research. When doing so, please take the following criteria from the most recent lecture into account to make sure that the research you find is valid and useful. First, make sure to be conscious of selection bias. Subjects of a study should be selected randomly, or at the least, used with a control group. Secondly, look at the sample size. If the sample size is too small, it is easy to overgeneralize the results. For example, the results of a study of my fourth grade students would not necessarily reflect the same results as middle school students from another part of the country, nor could you make the generalization that the results of my study would reflect the overwhelming majority of students in the country. You will also need to decide if the researchers considered alternate explanations for the results they discovered. Where the results due to the area of focus, or was there another element contributing to those results? Finally, the research needs to be done free of agendas or ulterior motives. The research should serve to answer a question rather than promote a certain viewpoint. By incorporating educational research into your classroom, not only are you improving your skills as a teacher, but you are providing a higher level education to your students. Sincerely, Edie Erickson Instructor FeedbackEdith, your advice was sound and easy to follow. I appreciate how you wove clear and personal examples to help illustrate the issues. Nicely written! As a teacher, I would like to address the issue of the Accelerated Reader program. In short, Accelerated Reader is a program that tests students over books that they have read and awards points for high scores. Many schools offer incentives or even grades for students that meet point goals. The idea behind the program seems great, but the problem is, students are not actually benefiting from the program. According to a report by the US Department of Education, the average rate of improvement in reading comprehension based on usage of the program is zero points. (What Works Clearninghouse, 2008) The program does not actually provide any instruction to the students, thus it does not actually help students to become better readers (Biggers, 2001). Additionally, in my own experience as a teacher, I have noticed that students tend to rush through books so that they can take a large number of tests, rather than reading carefully and thoughtfully as good readers should. Students are awarded a percentage of the possible points even when scoring poorly on the tests. This means that a student can achieve their points goal while still scoring poorly on their tests, meaning that they are being rewarded for mediocre to poor work. In addition, the program also turns students away from quality books that do not have quizzes; students do not want to "waste" their time reading a book if there is not something in it for them. In the end, it is an expensive program that data has not shown is not effective. As educators, we need to find better, research based approaches to instructing our students.
Biggers, D. (2001). The argument against accelerated reader. In Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy(Vol. 45, pp. 72-75). Retrieved from http://dianedalenberg.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/argument-against-ar.pdf. What Works Clearinghouse. US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (2008).Accelerated reader. what works clearinghouse intervention report(http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502922.pdf). Retrieved from website: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502922.pdf (1) Is the Accelerated Reader program by Renaissance Learning an effective tool for measuring reading comprehension? What are the long term effects on the reader’s desire to read for enjoyment?
(2) I will be studying my 4th grade students. (3) In my study, I will be looking at the effectiveness of the Accelerated Reader program in terms of measuring reading comprehension as well as improving student attitudes towards reading. (4) To gauge the effectiveness of the program, I will have the students complete reading attitude surveys at the beginning and end of my research. I will also analyze student test scores and compare them with oral and/or written summaries of the book conveyed/written by the students. (5) For the reading attitudes portion, my research will take a non-experimental quantitative design. Students will be taking surveys as the main means of determining their attitudes towards reading. To determine the effectiveness of the program in terms of measuring reading comprehension, I will take a mixed-method approach, focusing more on the explanatory research design. In phase one, I will look at the test scores of the students. In phase two, I will interview students or ask for written summaries which will be used to determine whether the Accelerated Reader quiz score seems to align with the depth of understanding conveyed in the oral or written summary.
|
About MeI'm Edie - wife, mom, teacher, instructional designer, home renovator,
and lover of nature, travel, technology, and vintage campers! Archives
June 2014
Categories
All
|