I don’t think it’s possible to talk about THE Elementary/Middle Years Learner and I think talking about THE characteristics of an Elementary/Middle Years learner generates an unending list of possibilities. I think the biggest challenge of teaching will be the diversities of students in the classroom. The characteristics of these learners are wide-ranging. In a class of 30+ students, there will be a huge variety of strengths, weaknesses, abilities and experiences being brought to each desk. In fact, there will be 30+ different combinations of the pre-mentioned characteristics, plus others. The thought of having to lead that many individuals in one room is intimidating, it almost sounds impossible. Or crazy. However, I think there are common traits among students (and human beings) which are how teachers can start to connect with their students. I don’t want to generalize, but I think most people are curious, social, somewhat self-aware and consistently changing. When students find something interesting, they want to learn about it. As a teacher, the key is to make subjects interesting, exciting, and, in particular, accessible. This is where the challenge lies because what is accessible to one student may not be for another. This is where Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development is important.
too easy too hard
too easy too hard
These are very simplified visuals of how I picture a range of students in a classroom and their relationship to a certain task. Each student has a unique ZPD, but there will be some overlap. The students who are in similar zones can help, or scaffold, each other and their teacher can guide them. People are social, and students will learn through social interactions. Within Piaget’s theory, each student will be bringing a unique set of schema to the classroom. Each will have access to different material with which they will assimilate or accommodate as they are exposed to new information. Each learner is unique, yet their social nature and curiosity are common between them.
BC ELA IRP
There are positive and negative aspects about the BC ELA IRP in regards to my above remarks. How can one document cover the needs of so many individuals? The same Prescribed Learning Outcomes for every grade 7 student in British Columbia? Forget it!! But wait... Although the BC ELA IRP is an external set of standards and expectations for what students should know by the end of each grade level, it is also a tool for teachers. Instead of viewing it as a document telling me what to do, I chose to view it as providing a starting point for my role as a scaffolder. From the PLOs, I should be able to get an idea of where the students have been, where they are, and where I can reasonably expect them to go. I think the PLOs are explicit enough to be useful and flexible enough to be adapted by the teacher for the learner. Also, what an outcome means for one student might look quite different for another student. I feel interpreting the PLOs for individual students can be a slippery slope, but I think a good teacher will support their students appropriately. For example:
One ELA PLO for grade 7 states: It is expected that students will:
C3: Write a variety of imaginative writing for a range of purposes and audiences, including short stories, passages and poems modelled from literature, featuring strategically developed ideas by using interesting sensory detail.
It is possible that student A will write a short story and include two examples from each of the 5 senses while student B will include three examples of one sense and student C will use very descriptive language to describe one sensory experience. Each student has met the PLO, but in different ways. The IRPs are good resources for teachers and students. They provide a starting point from which to build lessons and present end goals which can help motivate students. The role of the teacher is to be flexible and creative by being able to adapt and extend the PLOs to meet the needs of individual students.
No comments:
Post a Comment