The other afternoon, Allison Townsend and I examined the question “What is Personalized Learning?” Then we mapped out one of my favorite definitions to date here in this Tweet. What we came up with was this:
Personalizing learning is about exposing children to a library of skills and strategies that empowers them to make school what they need it to be.
In this blog series, I hope to provide teachers with a map towards figuring out how they might effectively do this within their own classrooms. My goal is to examine the difference between two categories in our state’s teacher assessment system. Then, I hope to create guiding questions that will allow teachers to better understand how to personalize learning for their students while adhering to the criteria of the Teacher Keys Effectiveness System (TKES).
For the purposes of this blog, I am skipping Performance Standard 1: Professional Knowledge because that standard does not relate to direct interactions with students. The purpose of this blog is to address the "how" of personalizing learning, so I wanted to dive right in and address actions that will produce immediate results Ironically, by reading this blog series and evaluating your practice once you share your thoughts on the matter with your colleagues or administration you are transitioning from a Level III to a Level IV when it comes to “demonstrating extensive pedagogical knowledge.”
For the purposes of this blog, I am skipping Performance Standard 1: Professional Knowledge because that standard does not relate to direct interactions with students. The purpose of this blog is to address the "how" of personalizing learning, so I wanted to dive right in and address actions that will produce immediate results Ironically, by reading this blog series and evaluating your practice once you share your thoughts on the matter with your colleagues or administration you are transitioning from a Level III to a Level IV when it comes to “demonstrating extensive pedagogical knowledge.”
Performance Standard 2: Instructional Planning
The teacher plans using state and local school district curricula and standards, effective strategies, resources, and data to address the differentiated needs of all students.
Let us evaluate the difference between the Level III and Level IV columns. A teacher working at a Level III maintains a teacher-centered approach to planning that could be prepared and implemented across a wide array of classrooms. These are plans that might be created in a vacuum and implemented in various classrooms with no regard for the needs or interests of individual students. This is not to say that these could not be strong and engaging plans, but when they are created without the students’ interest and abilities in mind, then they are not yet reaching the level of personalization needed to achieve a Level IV in Instructional Planning.
In order to reach a Level IV, let us set a clear goal as we examine language in the Exemplary column. A useful format could look like this:
In order to reach a Level IV, let us set a clear goal as we examine language in the Exemplary column. A useful format could look like this:
"I can skill , by strategy , so purpose ."
I often use this sentence frame with teachers when I find that their learning targets for students appear generic and out of context.
In order to plan for instruction that is personalized, a teacher could now analyze how they might complete the following sentence frame based on the criteria in Level IV:
In order to plan for instruction that is personalized, a teacher could now analyze how they might complete the following sentence frame based on the criteria in Level IV:
“I can seek and use multiple data and real world resources by strategy , so that I may promote student accountability and engagement.”
Seeking and Using Multiple Data
The word that sticks out when defining the difference between the two categories is “multiple.” A teacher might give a pre-test at the beginning of an instructional unit, and then separate students into leveled groups to differentiate instruction. This is solid practice, but it would also be classified as Proficient if the teacher was only using a single source of data to plan for strategies and resources to use to “address the differentiated needs of all students.”
For a teacher to “continually seek and use multiple data,” there must be a clear indication in their plans that multiple formative assessments will be given so data is continually sought after. Then, we must create space in our plans after the assessment for flexible instruction to be given to varying students or student groups. This is why our plans need to have blocks of time set aside for new, personalized, strategies to be introduced to our students at different times throughout units based on their performance.
This practice promotes student accountability because this structured time for feedback and strategy introduction empowers students to move forward and tackle more challenging tasks in the future. When students feel empowered, then we also see a rise in their level of engagement. This student engagement is a product of Instructional Planning at an Exemplary level.
For a teacher to “continually seek and use multiple data,” there must be a clear indication in their plans that multiple formative assessments will be given so data is continually sought after. Then, we must create space in our plans after the assessment for flexible instruction to be given to varying students or student groups. This is why our plans need to have blocks of time set aside for new, personalized, strategies to be introduced to our students at different times throughout units based on their performance.
This practice promotes student accountability because this structured time for feedback and strategy introduction empowers students to move forward and tackle more challenging tasks in the future. When students feel empowered, then we also see a rise in their level of engagement. This student engagement is a product of Instructional Planning at an Exemplary level.
Seeking and Using Real World Resources
The use of real world resources in the classroom has a profound impact on student learning. When we use teacher-made resources or prepackaged passages and units for students to practice strategies, we are creating an extra step for students as they experiment with transferring their learning into the real world.
Real world resources are not always cut and dry. If a child is trying to identify the cause and effect in a passage that is specifically written with that skill in mind, then there is not a lot of evaluation or heavy lifting happening on behalf of the child. Real world resources provide that challenge with the security of knowing that a teacher is close by to help navigate the messiness of applying strategies to contexts where the skill isn’t always relevant.
Another benefit of using real world resources is that students get to see how their learning can be applied immediately outside of the classroom. This becomes personalized because every child’s world is different, but the strategies that they use to tackle the complexities of that world can be taught in school. Teacher-made resources and prepackaged passages and units do have a place. They function as scaffolds, and we have to see them as just that...scaffolds. These resources must bridge our students to doing real work with real world resources so that they may use, revise, and evaluate which strategies are most effective for them in their own lives.
Real world resources are not always cut and dry. If a child is trying to identify the cause and effect in a passage that is specifically written with that skill in mind, then there is not a lot of evaluation or heavy lifting happening on behalf of the child. Real world resources provide that challenge with the security of knowing that a teacher is close by to help navigate the messiness of applying strategies to contexts where the skill isn’t always relevant.
Another benefit of using real world resources is that students get to see how their learning can be applied immediately outside of the classroom. This becomes personalized because every child’s world is different, but the strategies that they use to tackle the complexities of that world can be taught in school. Teacher-made resources and prepackaged passages and units do have a place. They function as scaffolds, and we have to see them as just that...scaffolds. These resources must bridge our students to doing real work with real world resources so that they may use, revise, and evaluate which strategies are most effective for them in their own lives.
An Interpretation
As I move forward with this blog series, I want everyone to understand that this is my interpretation of the difference between a differentiated and personalized learning environment. I have not sat down with administrators and agreed on these expectations. All of the information presented in this blog comes from my experiences over the last three years of working in classrooms while using the TKES rubrics to measure the level of student ownership in classrooms. Please use the commenting features below to let me know your thoughts. I am excited to continue with this exploration, and having more people engaged in the conversation only helps increase the quality of the work.
Thank you again for reading, and thank you all for everything you do for our children.
Thank you again for reading, and thank you all for everything you do for our children.