Education for All The Report of the Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With pecial Education Needs, Kindergarten to Grade 6 2005 The Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs wishes to express its gratitude to the staff of the Special Education Policy and Programs Branch of the Ministry of Education for their administrative support during the preparation of this report. The members of the Expert Panel extend their thanks to the Minister’s Advisory Council on Special Education (MACSE) for suggesting the creation of an expert panel to present this report on literacy and numeracy components for students with special education needs. Introduction About This Report The Ministry of Education established the Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs to recommend practices, based on research, that would allow Ontario’s teachers to improve and reinforce effective instruction of reading, writing, oral communication, and mathematics to students from Kindergarten to Grade 6 who have special education needs. Education for All: The Report of the Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs, Kindergarten to Grade 6 was built on a powerful foundation – Ontario’s ambitious province-wide process of consultation and professional learning on literacy and numeracy. The Expert Panel is deeply indebted to the groundwork of its predecessor panels. Early Reading Strategy: The Report of the Expert Panel on Early Reading in Ontario and Early Math Strategy: The Report of the Expert Panel on Early Math in Ontario were released in 2003; Literacy for Learning: The Report of the Expert Panel on Literacy in Grades 4 to 6 in Ontario and Teaching and Learning Mathematics: The Report of the Expert Panel on Mathematics in Grades 4 to 6 in Ontario were released in 2004. Historical Context Special education in Ontario has evolved in the context of a broad social movement advocating the closure of residential institutions, which had housed many persons with special needs, and the inclusion of these persons, with appropriate support services, as fully as possible, in the life of the community. The legal requirement that schools serve all children with special needs is fairly recent. Until the early 1950s, parents and caregivers were expected to take responsibility for the provision of education for children with special needs. During the thirty years from 1950 to 1980, students with special learning needs were inconsistently served. Many were placed in regular schools, but accommodations were usually not provided. Some drifted away from school, while others managed to obtain some measure of formal education through luck, dividual teacher support, and family intervention. For many children with severe difficulties, the provision of ducation remained a parental or community responsibility until 1980. Although the Hope Commission recommended expansion of special education programs in 1950, educational reforms did not get under way until the 1960s and into the 1970s. In 1962, the Government of Ontario repealed most of its human rights laws in order to make way for the Ontario Human Rights Code, the first comprehensive human rights code in Canada. The Code affirmed the right to equal access to services, including education. However, it was not until 1982 that the Code was amended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap. Through the 1970s, major reforms initiated in the previous decade, such as the Robarts Plan and the Hall-Dennis Report, were implemented in Ontario classrooms. Programs and services for students with special needs, however, were still lacking. School boards were still not required to offer special education programs and services, although some did. It was not until 1980 that Ontario’s Education Amendment Act, also known as Bill 82, required Ontario school boards to provide special education programs and services for all students with special education needs. In most jurisdictions it became standard practice to place students with special education needs in regular schools but in self-contained classes according to their particular needs. This practice was generally known as “mainstreaming” or “integration (in a regular school)”. A series of landmark reports published in the 1970s, including One Million Children: A National Study of Canadian Children with Emotional and Learning Disorders (Roberts & Lazure, 1970) and Standards for Education of Exceptional Children in Canada (Hardy, McLeod, Minto, Perkins, & Quance, 1971), encouraged parents and educators alike to begin questioning the value of special education programs that isolated students from regular education programs. Public support grew for the inclusion of children with exceptionalities into the regular classroom. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which came into effect in 1982, created concerns that a school board’s decision to place a student in a separate, special class might be a violation of his or her equality rights under the Charter. The 1997 Supreme Court decision in the Eaton case made it clear that placement of children with special education needs should be decided on a case-by-case basis, with the key determinant being the student’s best interests. Regulation 181, enacted in 1998, legislated the requirement that the first consideration regarding placement for an “exceptional pupil” be placement in a regular class with appropriate supports, when such placement meets the student’s needs and is in accordance with parents’ wishes. Ministry policy requires that a range of options continue to be available for students whose needs cannot be met within the regular classroom. Today’s Context Regular classroom teachers in Ontario serve a growing number of students with diverse abilities. According to school board statistics, most students with special needs spend at least 50 per cent of their instructional day in a regular classroom, being taught by regular classroom teachers. It is imperative that inclusion means not only the practice of placing students with special needs in the regular classroom but ensuring that teachers assist every student to prepare for the highest degree of independence possible. Ontario’s Education Act specifically defines “exceptional pupil” and recognizes categories of behavioural, communicational, intellectual, physical, and multiple exceptionalities. For the purposes of identification of “exceptional pupils”, there are currently twelve exceptionality definitions. Many Ontario students have not been formally identified as “exceptional”, but still exhibit abilities that indicate that they are in need of special education programs and/or services. In any given classroom, students may demonstrate an extensive range of learning needs. Some may, for instance, have difficulties with reading, writing, or mathematics. Others may be new to our languages and culture, or speak another language with more fluency than the language of the classroom. Still others may read complex books or understand advanced mathematical concepts. Some may appear to lack motivation or be underachievers relative to their abilities. Whatever the reasons for the student’s needs, teachers must be prepared to respond effectively and ensure that each student is learning to his or her potential. The Expert Panel has taken an inclusive, non-categorical – rather than exceptionality-based – approach to address programming for students with special education needs. This report has been written to assist teachers in helping all of Ontario’s students learn, including those students whose abilities make it difficult for them to achieve their grade-level expectations. “Language traditions and language rights influence the nature and development of a culture . . . . Aboriginal communities in Ontario are seeking to preserve and develop their languages through community-based literacy learning. As well, Ontario has a long tradition of growth through immigration, with many people from around the world bringing their language, culture, and experiences to this country.With increasing globalization and the shift to an information economy, the diverse backgrounds and experiences of all people become a resource base that can enrich life and benefit all Ontarians.” (Expert Panel on Literacy in Grades 4 to 6 in Ontario, 2004, pp. 6–7) French-Language Education The French language is recognized in law as an important component of the cultural identification of students in French-language schools, not just as a tool for reading and writing. The French language is an essential part of daily life in francophone communities across Ontario. Ontario’s schools protect the right of the French linguistic minority populations to receive instruction in their own language, as set out in section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Ontario’s Aménagement linguistique policy, released in 2004, is intended to ensure the protection, enhancement, and transmission of the French language and culture in minority settings. This policy also specifies parameters for French-language education. What We Believe The following beliefs sum up the Expert Panel’s guiding principles and the key themes of this report. Belief 1: All students can succeed. All students can demonstrate competence in literacy and numeracy. Teachers can ensure their students’ success by getting to know them through ongoing observation, assessment, and evaluation, and then carefully establishing the next steps each student needs to take in order to learn. Belief 2: Universal design and differentiated instruction are effective and interconnected means of meeting the learning or productivity needs of any group of students. Universal design ensures that the classroom and other learning environments are as usable as possible for students, regardless of their age, ability, or situation. Teachers should also aim to respond to the specific learning profiles of individual students with differentiated instruction. Belief 3: Successful instructional practices are founded on evidence-based research, tempered by experience. Children with special needs benefit most when teachers deliver programming informed by both professional judgement and domain knowledge supported by empirical evidence. Good pedagogy is based on good research. Basing instruction on sound research will avoid the pitfall of following trends that lack efficacy. Belief 4: Classroom teachers are the key educators for a student’s literacy and numeracy development. Students with special education needs may receive important support and programming from a number of people, but the key educator for literacy and numeracy development is the classroom teacher(s). Classroom teachers are ideally placed to gather ongoing assessment data and monitor student learning. They have the advantage of knowing the child well and can provide valuable feedback for others working with the student. Belief 5: Each child has his or her own unique patterns of learning. Patterns of learning may vary greatly within a classroom. Teachers need to plan for diversity, give students tasks that respect their abilities, use dynamic and flexible grouping for instruction, and provide ongoing assessment. Belief 6: Classroom teachers need the support of the larger community to create a learning environment that supports students with special education needs. Teachers have a challenging and complex job. It is their responsibility to create the best possible learning environment for each and every student in their classrooms. Teachers can best help their students succeed when they are able to reach out to the larger community of learners. Teachers need support from their principal, special education resource teacher(s), other classroom teachers, and other professionals. Families and community support agencies are crucial contributors. Everyone has a place in the process. Belief 7: Fairness is not sameness. Treating all children exactly the same means that children who need accommodations or modifications to the program in order to succeed will be disadvantaged. Some students require more or different support than others in order to work at a level appropriate to their abilities and needs. How to Use This Report The Expert Panel’s goal was to develop a framework, based on solid research, that would support the efforts of Ontario’s teachers to improve the quality of instruction for all their students, from Kindergarten to Grade 6. This report provides Ontario teachers with specific strategies that will help them teach literacy and numeracy more effectively to students with diverse strengths and needs; show them how to develop a learning profile of classrooms and of individual students; provide assessment, evaluation, and planning strategies; and provide detailed information on instructional support and assistive technology. To maximize its usefulness, the report complements existing ministry curriculum documents, resource documents, and guides to effective instruction, as well as previous expert panel reports on literacy and numeracy. This report can become an invaluable day-to-day resource for educators, a useful hands-on reference document that will enable every classroom teacher to fully support all the students in his or her classroom. At the same time, we recognize that its content is based on what we know now. Future findings, driven by new technologies, research, and teaching tools will continue to shape our own learning as well as the possibilities for Ontario’s students. Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs The panel’s members include English- and French-language teachers, principals, consultants, researchers, and professors from Catholic and public school boards and universities across Ontario. Each member has demonstrated expertise and leadership in the teaching of reading, writing, and mathematics to students with special learning needs. Co-chairs Jean-Luc Bernard Directeur de l’éducation et secrétaire-trésorier Conseil scolaire de district du Centre-Sud-Ouest Lesly Wade-Woolley, Ph.D Associate Professor Cognitive Studies and Educational Psychology Faculty of Education Queen’s University Marcia A. Barnes, Ph.D. Associate Professor and University Research Chair Psychology Department University of Guelph Micheline Godbout Beitel, Ph.D. Psychologue et superviseur Conseil scolaire de district du Centre-Sud-Ouest Marie-Josée Berger, Ph.D. Professeure et Doyenne Faculté d’éducation Université d’Ottawa Brigitte Bergeron Directrice des services à l’élève Conseil scolaire de district catholique Centre-Sud Jocelyne Bouffard Personne-ressource au service à l’élève Conseil scolaire catholique Franco-Nord André L. Duguay Directeur Centre Jules Léger Anik Gagnon Directrice École élémentaire Patricia-Picknell Conseil scolaire de district du Centre-Sud-Ouest Yves Herry, Ph.D. Vice-doyen Faculté d’éducation Université d’Ottawa James Horan Principal The Prince Charles School Limestone District School Board Anna Jupp Mathematics/Numeracy Instructional Leader Toronto District School Board Colin J. Laine, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus Faculty of Education University of Western Ontario Martine Leclerc, Ph.D Professeure Département des sciences de l’éducation Université du Québec en Outaouais Claire Maltais, Ph.D. Professeure agrégée Secteur francophone, Formation à l’enseignement Université d’Ottawa Rhonda Martinussen, Ph.D. Post-Doctoral Fellow Community Health Systems Research Group Hospital for Sick Children Pauline Morais Directrice des services à l’élève Conseil scolaire de district des écoles catholiques du Sud-Ouest Karen Morrison Department Head, Special Education Clarke Rd. Secondary School Thames Valley District School Board Don Parsons Coordinator of Student Services Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board Marlene Sartor Psychometrist/Teacher Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board Nancy Vézina Professeure adjointe Faculté d’éducation Université d’Ottawa Ellen Walters Principal St. Joseph Richmond Hill York Catholic District School Board Vera Woloshyn, Ph.D. Professor Director, Brock Reading Clinic Faculty of Education Brock University Planning for Inclusion: Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction As indicated in Chapter 1, inherent in several of the Expert Panel’s core beliefs is the need for teachers to plan for diversity if their students are to gain the greatest benefits from the teaching and learning process. They can plan for learning in a diverse, inclusive environment through the principles and guidelines provided by Universal Design for Learning and differentiated instruction. [Page 9 chart omitted] Universal Design for Learning (UDL) “Universal Design is not just a technique for special education; rather it is a technique to enhance the learning of all students.” (Turnbull,Turnbull, Shank, Smith, & Leal, 2002, p. 92) “With the premise that each student can benefit from a flexible curriculum offering clear goals, multiple pathways for reaching those goals, and fair and accurate assessment, the Universal Design Curriculum reflects an understanding that each learner is unique.” (Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose, & Jackson, 2002, p. 20) Universal Design for Learning (UDL) was inspired by work in architecture on the planning of buildings with a view to accessibility for people with physical disabilities (Turnbull et al., 2002). Architects observed that the added improvements facilitated access for all users, not just people with physical disabilities. An access ramp, for instance, provides a person using a wheelchair with easier access to a building, but it also makes it easier for a parent with a child’s stroller, a traveller with a baggage trolley, or someone using a walker. Eventually, researchers in other fields noted that specialized technology meant for a target population is also useful for others. Subtitles originally designed to help people who are deaf or hearing impaired, for instance, now replace the sound of televisions in loud places such as airports and sports centres, or, inserted into films on DVDs, help teach languages. The notion that assistance targeted at a specific group can help everyone, bolstered by recent research on inclusion and new technologies, has now made its way into the field of education. Educators have begun to realize that a teaching strategy or pedagogical materials that respond to the special needs of a specific student or group of students can also be useful for all students. UDL is an orientation intended to shape teaching in order to provide all students with access to the curriculum (Turnbull et al., 2002). Its aim is to assist teachers in designing products and environments to make them accessible to everyone, regardless of age, skills, or situations. UDL sees all learning as a continuum. Every student is unique, and will therefore benefit from a flexible curriculum that provides him or her with the appropriate pathways for reaching learning goals, as well as fair and accurate assessment. A classroom based on the concept of UDL is specifically planned and developed to meet the special needs of a variety of students, including students who are disabled and those who come from a non-dominant culture. It is flexible, supportive, and adjustable, and increases full access to the curriculum for all students. Core Concepts “In a diverse classroom, no single method can reach all learners. Multiple pathways to achieving goals are needed.” (Hitchcock et al., 2002, p. 18) Universality and equity. UDL is intended to ensure that teaching will meet the needs of all students. This does not mean planning instruction for students with average achievement levels, and then making after-the-fact modifications to meet the special needs of certain students. UDL encourages teachers to develop a class profile and then plan, from the beginning, to provide means and pedagogical materials that meet the needs of all students and not only those with special needs. Classrooms accommodate all students and a wide range of instructional methods. While teaching, the teacher attends to the needs of each student, and guides him or her in making the choices best adapted to his or her needs. All students enjoy privacy, security, and safety. None is segregated or stigmatized. Flexibility and inclusion. The planning of teaching and the time teachers allocate to students’ activities and needs must be sufficiently flexible to provide real learning experiences for all the students, regardless of their performance level. Students are accommodated through a variety of teaching strategies and pedagogical materials that make use of all the senses, technological media, assessment strategies, and ways of using space. Teachers can use a variety of techniques or devices to accommodate a variety of diverse students in their classrooms. Some students require right- or left-handed access, for instance, or the option to make oral versus written presentations. An appropriately designed space. Teachers can make sure that: • all students have a clear line of sight;• resources such as dictionaries and texts are within comfortable reach of all students; • there is adequate space for the use of assistive devices or teachers’ assistants; • classroom tools accommodate variations in hand grip size; • classrooms minimize distraction – students should be able to concentrate on instructional elements (such as posters on the wall) without having to process a plethora of other competing stimuli. Simplicity. Teachers avoid unnecessary complexity by communicating consistent expectations, arranging information sequentially to clarify its relative importance, breaking instructions down into small steps, and providing effective feedback during and after tasks. They minimize distracting information in the classroom. Safety. Classrooms must be safe, with minimal hazards and no elements that might cause accidents. The assessment of safety might depend on the specific children in the classroom. If any student has a safety plan or written safety protocol, every adult within the school needs to be aware of it and able to act on it. How to Use UDL to Plan Your Teaching UDL takes the many components of teaching into account: • expectations and objectives of learning situations • teaching strategies and learning situations • pedagogical materials • technological tools • variety of products resulting from learning situations • assessment The following example, in which students are expected to be able to identify the components of the structure of a short story, illustrates the use of UDL. Overall and specific objectives and expectations The objective of reading a story could be understanding the structure of a story, analysing the values conveyed by the text, developing an enjoyment of reading that type of text, analysing its verb tenses, and so on. In this case, the teacher precisely communicates, through discussion, that the objective of this assignment is to understand the structure of a story. The teacher also provides the students with his or her expectations in terms of the quality of learning they must achieve. Teaching strategies and learning situations Once the teacher has defined overall and specific expectations and objectives, the teacher provides students with achievable challenges through a variety of flexible strategies or learning situations to meet the needs of the students in ways that are adapted to their skill level. A student who has not had very much contact with short stories, for instance, might need to have stories read to him or her and to work with the teacher or a more advanced peer. Other students who are already familiar with the story type might benefit by working alone with stories. Students could also choose to start with a story and deduce its structure, while others could choose to start with the story structure and identify its components in a story. The teacher could suggest that students select one of the following: • Join with the teacher and other students in discussing the structure of the story as the teacher reads it. • Read the story yourself and try to describe the structure of the story, alone or in a team. • Read the story and try to describe its structure guided by a poster prepared by the teacher that has general information about the structure of a short story (with examples). • Write your own story, alone or in a team, applying the structure of a short story to it, guided by the poster. Pedagogical materials Pedagogical materials available to everyone may vary: • in form: short stories in classroom books, audio versions, books on computer-based media, and books in braille or large print; • in level of difficulty: stories of different lengths using various numbers of illustrations, stories with sentence structures of varying complexity, and so on; • in presentation: fonts of different sizes and books of different sizes to facilitate their manipulation. UDL integrates this variety of materials from the beginning of planning the teaching process. These materials should address multiple senses, individually or in combination, and could include text, pictures, graphs, mapping and images, sounds, voices, manipulatives, and so on. Technological tools Technology is used whenever necessary to facilitate students’ learning. It includes a variety of technological tools that assist learning, such as computers, screens with enlarged display, audio books, hearing apparatus, and so on. Detailed information on assistive technology is presented in Chapter 10. A variety of student products UDL is meant to encourage a varied range of productions. Students could demonstrate their comprehension of the structure of the story by illustrating the main steps of the story, giving an oral presentation, or performing a dramatized version. A similar approach is productive in mathematics. Table 7, A Sample Grade 1 Guided Mathematics Lesson, in Chapter 7 of this report, includes an example of how Universal Design for Learning might apply to mathematics. Instructional approaches in mathematics that allow the integration of concepts consistent with UDL include: • using shared mathematics to explore a problem; • using guided mathematics to model and guide through a specific concept; • using concrete materials/manipulatives; • making connections to a similar problem; • using a math game that develops the concept and skills related to the activity or problem. Assessment and evaluation Teaching requires accurate knowledge of student progress. Assessment consistent with UDL is sufficiently flexible to provide accurate, ongoing information that helps teachers adjust instruction and maximize learning. A test given in a single medium inevitably tests mastery of that medium (Rose & Meyer, 2002). If a student is provided with accommodations in instruction, he or she frequently receives the same types of accommodations in assessment. Differentiated Instruction “Behind every standard, uniform and abstract [idea of a] student, there is a … real-life student that cannot be ignored, especially if you want to help him or her to not stay where he is, to come out of his shell and to open up to others.” (Zakhartchouk, 2001, p. 23) A teacher may wonder “How do I manage many reading and math groups in one classroom? How do I manage the mixed abilities of the students in my classroom (well below grade level to well above grade level)?” Differentiated instruction can provide the answer to these difficult questions. The theory behind differentiated instruction comes from the views of Vygotsky (1980). According to Vygotsky, social context and the interactions of the student within that social context play a fundamental role in the acquisition of knowledge. Students in their “zone of proximal development” can, with assistance, resolve a problem that they could not have resolved alone and move on to another level of knowledge. Teachers can help accelerate students’ cognitive development (Vienneau, 2005) by supporting children in resolving problems, by questioning their conceptions, and by asking them to justify their positions (Lafortune & Deaudelin, 2001). They can also provide specific interventions, known in this context as “scaffolding”. While Universal Design for Learning provides the teacher with broad principles for planning, differentiated instruction allows teachers to address specific skills and difficulties (Raynal & Rieunier, 1998). Differentiated instruction requires teachers to transform their practices from a program-based pedagogy to a student-based pedagogy. Teachers attempt to adapt pedagogical interventions to the needs of each student, acknowledging that each student differs in interests, learning profile, and level of functioning. Differentiated instruction may facilitate high levels of both student engagement and curricular achievement (Caron, 2003; Tomlinson, 2004). Curriculum tells teachers what to teach, while differentiated instruction tells teachers how to teach it to a range of learners by employing a variety of teaching approaches. Students can develop their potential if they are provided with appropriate activities in an environment that is planned and organized to meet the needs of all students. The teacher can differentiate one or a number of the following elements in any classroom learning situation (Tomlinson, 2004): • the content (what the students are going to learn) • the processes (the activities) • the products (the accomplishment following a learning period) Differentiating instruction can include using a variety of groupings to meet student needs; providing accommodated instruction/assessment activities where required; and challenging students at an appropriate level (through modifications), in light of their readiness, interests, and learning profiles. In a differentiated class, the teacher provides instruction at the level students have reached in terms of the curriculum. The learning goals must be adjusted to the abilities of each individual. Students should be observed and evaluated in the learning situation to determine what the expectations should be, using a formative approach; periodic overviews of skills should be done and decisions should be made based on progress. Differentiating instruction may also include flexible grouping strategies; all students working on the same activity (individually, in small groups, or as a whole group); and assigning different tasks in different situations. Teachers use varied techniques that allow the students to acquire knowledge and skills. Teachers can create alternative ways for students to demonstrate knowledge and skills, such as using drawings or other visual means to organize or generate ideas. Teachers can explore ways to infuse logical accommodations that can benefit all students. For example, teachers can highlight important words in text or allow students to record their answers on a tape recorder. Figure 2. A Concept Map for Differentiating Instruction [Page 15 chart omitted] Planning for Inclusion Linking the broad principles of Universal Design for Learning with the focused features of differentiated instruction provides the teacher with a strong foundation for selecting appropriate approaches. Teachers already use many instructional techniques, such as cooperative learning, project-based or problem-based approaches to learning, and explicit instruction, that can be very compatible with the principles of Universal Design for Learning and differentiated instruction. Cooperative learning approach Cooperative learning emphasizes small-group work. The teacher puts students with different abilities and talents into a small group and assigns that group a specific task, with the requirement that the students work together to achieve this goal (Clarke, Widerman, & Eadie, 1992; Howden & Kopiec, 1999; Howden & Martin, 1997; Perrenoud, 1998a). The teacher needs to structure the task so that no member of the team can complete it on his or her own (Arcand, 2004; Clarke, et al.; Howden & Kopiec; Howden & Martin). These groups foster both positive interdependence and responsibility. All the students share the same goal as well as knowledge, expertise, and resources, and together actively participate in searching for a solution. They grow to understand that their own involvement and their efforts provide solid support for their teammates and are essential for the success of the team (Arcand, 2004). Students use their social interactions within the group to verbalize and reformulate their ideas, confront each other with new ideas, and discuss and compare their ways of learning. As a result, they are able to clarify and better understand important concepts. In addition, students learn appropriate social behaviour and skills when they are put into a learning situation that requires them to work constructively with a group. They learn to listen to one another, help and provide constructive criticism to one another in a courteous manner, and encourage others to express themselves (Gamble, 2002; Arcand, 2004). Within this nonthreatening environment where they are allowed to make mistakes, students are even able to take risks in their attempts to solve a problem (Clarke et al., 1992; Howden & Kopiec, 1999; Howden & Martin, 1997). Project-based approach This approach requires the teacher to facilitate learning through projects. For example, a student may bring in a seashell, and after group discussion this may result in a great variety of “projects” – books, artwork, posters. Students may be required to analyse data, develop a synthesis, and present their newly acquired knowledge (Francoeur-Bellavance, 2001). Essentially, students take responsibility for acquiring knowledge, interacting with peers and the environment, while the teacher’s role is to mediate between students and the knowledge to be acquired (Arpin & Capra, 2001; Francoeur-Bellavance; Perrenoud, 1999). This approach gives students’ work meaning, and allows them to do work based on real issues and to experience an authentic task in a real-life context. The open nature of project-based learning also allows students to choose subjects they are interested in, at their own level (Leclerc, 1998, 2000). Furthermore, teachers can use open questions to provide students in mixed-ability groupings with the opportunity to work simultaneously on a number of options. Teachers should demonstrate that they value what their students learn through the process of seeing the project through to completion as much as they value the end product (Morisette, 2002; Perrenoud, 1998a), and make sure that they find at least one task appropriate to each student. This approach does not, however, guarantee skills development. Teachers need to monitor carefully that students are attempting tasks at the most appropriate instructional level (Perrenoud, 1997, 1999). Problem-based approach This approach, originally developed in faculties of medicine, requires the teacher to present students with a realistic, believable problem that they can solve only through the acquisition of a new skill. Students reflect on the best process or strategy for solving the problem, and are also encouraged to develop or question effective procedures used in other problem situations (Perrenoud, 1998a). Teachers can create some problem situations for very specific purposes, and allow others to arise in a less planned manner. In both cases, they should carefully plan what they want to work on and what cognitive challenges they wish to provide their students. Like the project-based approach, the problem-based approach requires students to overcome obstacles to develop new knowledge and skills, use authentic and personally relevant situations, and conduct comprehensive, complex, goal-oriented, and meaningful tasks. The main difference is that the teacher, not the student, chooses the task. While students may be less motivated to do work they have not chosen, teachers can cover specific subjects and make sure that students are challenged just enough to grow in their learning. As Perrenoud (1998a) points out, it is not necessary to make every problem situation into a project. The teacher’s challenge when using this approach is to ensure differentiation of instruction. It is tempting in problem-solving tasks for teachers to favour the most able, vivacious, perceptive, and independent students (Perrenoud, 1998a). Explicit instruction One of the foundational goals of education is to educate students to become life-long, independent learners. While some students are readily able to work independently and will need little guidance to acquire effective learning strategies and skills, others will require greater assistance. Furthermore, students’ abilities to work independently may vary depending on the specific learning task at hand (e.g., completing a math problem-solving activity versus writing a persuasive essay). In other words, students’ abilities to learn independently fall on a continuum, so teachers must provide students with a range of structured to unstructured learning opportunities (Pressley, Wharton-McDonald, Mistretta-Hampston, & Echevarria, 1998; Pressley, Yokoi, & Rankin, 1996). Some students, especially those with special education needs, will require instruction that uses overt thinking processes (e.g., using modelling and think-aloud), or what is sometimes referred to as explicit instruction (Gaskins, 1998; Kamil, Mosenthal, Pearson, & Barr, 2000; National Reading Panel, 2000). Explicit instruction requires teachers to frequently model appropriate learning strategies. To help students “discover” that a strategic approach is superior to a non-strategic one, teachers can: • verbalize their thought processes, including the steps they take in a strategy or learning process, as well as the parameters associated with the use of these thought processes; • share relevant personal learning experiences related to the concept or strategy they are teaching; • provide students with opportunities to practise using the strategy, guiding their attempts to do so until they can carry out the strategy independently (Almasi, 2003; Woloshyn, Elliott, & Kaucho, 2001). Learning how to use strategies effectively requires time and motivation. Initially many students will require substantial time and extensive guidance and support to learn how to execute effective learning strategies. With practice, students can learn to execute strategies faster and more competently. Over time and with the gradual introduction of multiple learning strategies, students can develop repertoires of effective learning tools (Almasi, 2003; Collins-Block & Pressley, 2002; Duffy, 1993; Pressley & Woloshyn, 1995; Woloshyn, Elliot, & Riordan, 1998). Assessment and Evaluation of Students With Special Education Needs Accurate assessment and evaluation are critically important to teachers who are committed to including students with special needs in regular classrooms. The assessment process is multidisciplinary, and occurs in a continuous cycle that is fully integrated into the learning–teaching process: at the outset of work; as work progresses; and at the conclusion to any work. It is also multi-tiered, beginning and ending with the classroom teacher and leading to an ongoing evolution of effective instruction, reassessment, and access to opportunities for achievement based on changing student needs (Salvia, 1990). The continuous assessment process builds upon the process recommended in Special Education: A Guide for Educators (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2001, p. 9). Teachers can use it when they need increasing levels of support to help them develop instructional interventions for their students. The assessment process is illustrated in Figure 3, on page 20. [Page 20 chart omitted] Before elaborating on the stages shown in Figure 3, it is critical that we clarify our terminology. Many people consider assessment and evaluation synonymous processes. One may further confuse educational assessment with a specific type of assessment, psycho-educational assessment. Please refer to the definitions in Table 1 to understand the distinctions among these terms as they are used in this document. Table 1. Assessment and Evaluation: Definitions of Terms Assessment Assessment is the process of systematically gathering information about student learning and/or cognition from a variety of sources, using a variety of techniques and tools.This information can be used to develop class and individual profiles. Assessment can relate to the instructional or working environment and/or the requirements of a particular strand or subject area. Assessments can be further characterized as assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning. Diagnostic assessments represent a type of assessment that provides specific information on the reasons a student may be experiencing learning difficulties. The key purpose of an assessment for students with special education needs is to ensure that they are provided with the most effective programming possible for accessing learning. Educational Assessment An educational assessment involves the use of a combination of tools to gather information about a student’s academic functioning and, sometimes, overall cognitive abilities. It can provide diagnostic information with respect to how a student approaches tasks and utilizes learning strategies in the various strands or subject areas. Educational assessments are usually completed by members of the in-school team. An educational assessment can provide information for an Identification Placement Review Committee (IPRC) decision and/or for the development of an Individual Education Plan (IEP), but does not result in a diagnosis. Psycho-educational Assessment A psycho-educational assessment consists of a series of tests to evaluate a student’s level and pattern of cognitive and academic functioning. It usually provides a detailed breakdown of cognitive processes. As psycho-educational assessments are completed by, or under the supervision of, a psychologist, they can result in a specific diagnosis, such as learning disability or developmental disability. Evaluation Evaluation refers to the process of judging the quality of student work on the basis of established criteria, and assigning a value to represent that quality. An effective evaluation should indicate a student’s progress and thus serve as a “navigational marker” that allows a teacher to make more accurate instructional decisions. Purposes of Assessment The purposes basic to any assessment are to help: • specify and verify problems; • make accurate decisions about students’ programs; • make a range of decisions, such as referral decisions, screening decisions, classification decisions, instructional planning decisions, or progress decisions; • determine requisite instruction; • determine particular interventions that may be necessary for the students to gain access to opportunities for achieving desired outcomes. The Process of Assessing For any type of assessment, the process that most teachers follow, and which they feel they know intuitively, is as follows: 1. Always know the purpose for assessment. 2. Decide what type of information is needed. – Qualitative or subjective information can be broadly descriptive or context-specific. – Quantitative or more objective information includes retestable information. 3. Decide which assessment tool will best give the information required and who will need to conduct the assessment. School-based educators usually carry out measures such as curriculum-based assessment, interviews, observation, or criterion-referenced testing. Other professionals administer certain standardized tests and other clinical testing procedures. 4. Ensure that parents or guardians are actively involved or consulted at all stages. Ample research (e.g., Resnick, 1994; Salvia & Ysseldyke, 2001) demonstrates that such a process provides the teacher with more accurate indicators for planning and for communication with parents and with other professionals. Approaches to Assessment A growing body of research focuses on the following three approaches to assessment: Assessment of learning – often referred to as “evaluation” – is: • connected to summative assessment (see p. 24); • used for reporting achievement (grades); • usually expressed in marks or letter grades; • used for accountability. Assessment for learning: • is connected to formative assessment (see below); • is interactive among participants; • entails teachers giving quick feedback in terms that make sense to students; • uses information to adjust plans and strategies – especially when modifying instruction and determining the accommodations that will be needed for the student to access learning. Assessment as learning: • is the most difficult yet the most important for a student with learning exceptionalities to grasp, because it is critical for independent progress; • emphasizes the role of the student as the critical connector between assessment and learning; • fosters self-monitoring through metacognition and the application of self-regulatory strategies (Earl, 2003). Types of Assessments Diagnostic assessment. This type of assessment, which provides teachers with diagnostic information, should be made whenever the need arises. It helps the teacher understand what a student brings to the classroom or to a specific subject. In the course of gathering information on students from previous teachers, parents, and formal sources (such as the Ontario Student Record, or OSR), teachers develop a baseline of information upon which further assessment will take place as is necessary to create a profile of the class and of individual students’ needs. If the teacher observes that individual students and groups of students within the classroom have significant skill deficits or unusually advanced skills, and if the OSR and these informal reports do not provide sufficient information to provide effective learning opportunities, then the teacher needs to consult with the in-school resource team. One outcome of the meeting could be consideration of a diagnostic assessment. For example, a student within a Junior Division classroom who exhibits significant deficits in sight vocabulary, and whose previous report cards indicate that he or she reads at an early primary level, might require a diagnostic assessment. The goal of the diagnostic assessment would be to provide more specific diagnostic information, such as whether the reading difficulties are related to, for example, phonemic awareness deficits, so that the teacher could provide targeted, and hence more effective, instruction. Formative assessment. This type of assessment provides benchmarks for individual students and groups of students in order to confirm instructional practices or specific interventions made by the teacher. Based on these benchmarks, teachers can: • perform a gap analysis, such as determining from running records that 12 of 22 students in a Grade 3 classroom lack prediction strategies when reading aloud; • reflect on past practice; and • begin to make decisions based on sound pedagogy for future instructional planning. An important element of formative assessment is the provision for immediate and accurate feedback to students and their parents. It also encourages teachers to conference, when possible, with students to maximize their potential to achieve outcomes. Summative assessment. This type of assessment generally occurs at the end of an instructional segment, module, unit, or term, and provides a fair and accurate reflection of what has been taught. When planning or developing a summative assessment, it is imperative that teachers examine the curricular elements that they have covered and assess only these elements. Teachers must also ensure a level playing field for all their students by giving consideration, where necessary, to providing additional time for students; providing different formats for assessing; ensuring that the language level of the assessment is similar to that used during the teaching; or providing “quiet space” for students. Summative assessments provide teachers with baseline data for planning subsequent instructional segments. The results of summative assessments must be communicated clearly to students, parents, and other professionals. Reports on results should explain differences, not merely describe them. These explanations will assist the teacher in future grouping of students within classroom activities and when activities are provided for new instructional units, and will also support specific interventions where needed. Assessment in the Classroom The teacher identifies needs; adopts particular strategies and recommends interventions; evaluates the results; and reassesses the learning situation. The teacher can, however, enter the assessment process at any point depending on what is known or not known about a student. The classroom teacher can select among many tools or instruments to conduct assessments in order to greatly increase the accuracy of classroom observations. The teacher’s most important assessment strategy: Observation and analysis Everything stems from clear and systematic observation within the classroom (e.g., are the skills consistently demonstrated? are inappropriate behaviours consistent? persistent? intense?). The teacher uses observation to maintain an awareness of the uniqueness that individual students bring to the classroom environment and to specific learning tasks. A good observation process allows the student to demonstrate capabilities within an inviting and engaging learning environment. Students should, for example, feel confident that they could demonstrate their knowledge without fear of repercussions from their peers. How to maximize the success of observation in the classroom • Observe students’ learning in a continuous, systematic, planned, and open manner throughout the school year. • Obtain descriptive information on a student’s learning at a point in time that shows how the student is progressing towards a learning outcome or specific intervention. • Communicate with the student to encourage him or her to take further risks in the classroom. • Use observation to encourage greater time on-task, which correlates highly with achievement. • Repeatedly observe a site-specific inappropriate behaviour or pattern of behaviour to determine whether or not it may be a barrier to learning. • Determine whether the inappropriate behaviour occurs in a variety of learning settings (e.g., mathematics class at 9:20 a.m. compared with observations made in environmental studies class conducted after lunch). Suggestions on how to record observations accurately • Approach the student’s learning of a task without bias in terms of personal perceptions of, or reactions to, possible inappropriate behaviours. The teacher needs to be specific and as objective – non-judgmental – as possible. • Know what you want to observe, and design your own framework to maximize information that will help enhance student learning. Your observations should be factual, and include data that you can readily manage and use immediately after the observation period. Avoid trying to observe too many things at the same time. • Set specific outcome targets in advance. For example, you may choose to observe the frequency of inattentive behaviour during a specific instructional segment of a lesson. • Record observations of appropriate behaviours and learning skills and indicate “next steps” when possible. Questions to consider when making observations of inappropriate behaviours How often have I observed a particular behaviour? Considerations: Frequency and consistency (e.g., of time and duration) can help a teacher determine how much of a barrier a particular off-task, inappropriate behaviour might be. Do particular behaviours seem to occur randomly, or is there a pattern? Considerations: Are the behaviours observed only during specific tasks or activities? Curriculum subjects? Times of day? Days of the week? A pattern of situation-specific observations is different from observations made across situations. Are behaviours intense enough that they interfere with any (new) learning tasks? Considerations: Children often demonstrate inappropriate behaviour when approaching new tasks. Those who have particular impairments to learning new things will take longer and may need more time to “catch on”; or they may need a different view of approaching the new task before they understand it. Questions to consider when observing skills Is there any correlation between observed classroom performance and other observational data (such as achievement on assignments, portfolios, or classroom tests, or a psychoeducational assessment)? Considerations: If the information gleaned from different environments (e.g., classroom versus clinic) is similar, then a teacher will have support for particular interventions; when information is contrary, there is a need for constructive discussion between student and teacher. Is the language used in my assessment of learning commensurate with the language level of the student and does it parallel the language I use in my teaching? Considerations: Evaluation of abilities can be biased if there are differences in the levels and types of language used between instruction and assessment (see Resnick & Resnick, 1989). Developing a detailed picture of a student’s strengths and needs Eventually, the teacher should be able to attain a detailed picture of the student’s strengths and needs from observational data and information from clinical reports, if available and applicable. Ideally, teachers can check their observational data against information gathered from other sources to confirm patterns revealed by observation and assessment. They can then further investigate discrepancies, and call in other experts, as needed. Teacher Conferences Observations made and data recorded in any one classroom may be specific to that situation or may apply across contexts. It is essential that teachers share ideas and confer with their students, their parents and guardians, and other teachers and professionals, not only about specific observations but also about their implications for instruction and interventions (see Gaddy, Dean, & Kendall, 2002, for more details). Assessment is thus a team approach that respects all partners in the process. The following components are important for any successful teacher-led conference: • Engage the student as soon as possible after you make your observations. • Be positive – relay a sense of optimism and enthusiasm for learning. • Be reassuring. • Be accurate in your descriptions. • Be interactive so that the student can express his or her perspective and engage you in what he or she is doing.• Assist the student in setting achievable goals. • When appropriate, offer specific strategies or remediations. • Using baseline data, set directions for future steps to be taken that confirm the student’s strengths; in other words, select a strategy or resource already in the student’s repertoire. • Use a variety of question and discussion techniques to encourage interaction. • Make the conference an opportunity for developing a student’s self-understanding, which will lead to greater independence. The In-School Support Team The in-school team is the “front line” of support for the classroom teacher. It may include the parents of the student, and may include the special education support teacher, subject leader, and/or school principal. This group should be informal and collegial. It can provide valuable insights into possible interventions, and should help pose questions that support the existing situation and actions taken. In-school teams play a significant role in helping classroom teachers address difficulties that a student may be experiencing in the classroom prior to, and after, formal assessment and identification. They are made up of people with various types of expertise who work together to: • support the student and the parent; • collaborate, consult, and share information and knowledge to identify strategies that may increase the student’s learning success. The active involvement of parents enhances the effectiveness of the in-school team. Parents and students have important information to share with members of the team and should be invited to meet with the team when necessary and appropriate. The support of parents has positive and pervasive effects on the child’s success in school, and parents should be encouraged to feel that their contribution is a valuable part of the school-team process. Based on the information gathered by the classroom teacher at the initial stage, members of the in-school team can suggest and assist in further assessments that may get to the root of a particular child’s learning needs. Other members of the team can assist in information gathering by conducting an educational assessment. The Out-of-School Support Team The school-based professionals may have done all they can to understand and address the student’s strengths and needs, but they may determine that the teacher still requires outside advice and, possibly, support from specialist professionals and community agencies. Reports from specialists provide additional information for the in-school team. The Psycho-educational Report In developing an Individual Education Plan (IEP), the psycho-educational assessment and report is the most common out-of-school report that a teacher will encounter. The psychoeducational report has two primary purposes: 1. To provide specific information on aspects of a child’s functioning, such as level and pattern of cognitive abilities, academic achievement, and behavioural and social-emotional function. 2. To provide recommendations, based on assessment results, that lead to specific programming. These recommendations may include accommodations and modifications. Psycho-educational reports delineate the cognitive processes and other factors that may be interfering with the student’s learning. They usually refer to and discuss general learning processes and behaviours using specific clinical terms. These terms are important for teachers to understand because they often relate to or explain behaviours that teachers are observing in classrooms. Different psycho-educational reports may incorporate different measures, but all will, in general, include valid and reliable measures of processes that have been found to have a major impact on learning. Reassessment The ultimate goal of a learning profile (see Chapter 4) is to guide appropriate instruction. But teachers need to be aware that a learning profile is a moving target. Although the child’s actual cognitive profile is relatively stable, his or her achievement will change over time. For example, the student will acquire new knowledge and skills, or may develop compensatory strengths that allow him or her to respond to teaching in new ways. Additionally, the demands of reading, writing, and mathematics change over the primary and junior grades, and these changes may make varying demands on the student. Whether or not a student has been “identified” as exceptional, is on a modified program, uses specialized equipment, or requires specific, clinical interventions outside of school, reassessment cannot be overlooked. Reassessment is crucial to assisting the classroom teacher in evaluating progress, in providing information whenever a student’s program is reviewed, and especially in ensuring “navigation markers” in the constantly-changing sea of a child’s learning environment. Table 2. Questions About Information in the Psycho-educational Report Teachers may want to ask the psychologist or other educational team members some of these questions about the information provided in the psycho-educational report: What does the report say about the achievement level of the student in literacy and numeracy relative to his or her age or grade placement? Are there specific patterns of strengths and weaknesses within each subject area? For example, in reading, what is the level of word decoding, reading fluency, listening comprehension, and reading comprehension? In math, what is the level of computational skills, geometry, and problem solving? Does the report provide information about strengths and difficulties in cognitive skills and abilities that can facilitate or impede learning? For example, does the report discuss the student’s memory skills, processing speed, attention? Factors such as these can have an impact on the student’s learning and on the types of modifications and accommodations that may need to be put into place. (The possible learning-related consequences of difficulties in these areas is elaborated in Table 3, How Cognitive Processes Affect Learning, in Chapter 4.) When there are inconsistencies between what I observe in the classroom and the information provided by the report, what is the next step? This situation requires further meetings and consultations among all educational partners. Follow-up observations in the classroom may be considered. If information regarding social/emotional functioning is provided in the report or through consultation, then what is the impact on student learning? Performance on a clinical assessment has important implications for in-class productivity. For example, the clinical report may provide information about factors such as anxiety, impulsivity, or depression. If any of these exist, they may affect a student’s functioning in the classroom across content domains, and require consultation with the school-based team to determine programming to support the student’s learning. Developing Learning Profiles: Know Your Students For the classroom teacher, who is responsible for meeting the learning needs of his or her students, effective instruction begins with an understanding of the needs of the learners, both collectively as a classroom unit and as individual students. If a child is demonstrating difficulties in school, it is important to identify the causes and take appropriate steps to alleviate them. Once a teacher knows the dynamics of the classroom and the individual student profiles that support those dynamics, the teacher can select effective teaching and learning strategies and interventions to maximize student achievement. Classroom and individual student learning profiles are informative and insightful for this purpose. Some district school boards may have already developed charts and diagrams that can be used to generate class and individual learning profiles. Some examples of charts used to record information are given in the appendices at the end of this chapter. Components of a class profile All of the following information is necessary to establish the classroom profile and to determine each student’s individual learning profile: Academic information – literacy and numeracy. This includes taking a “snapshot” of all the students in the class and identifying their level of performance in literacy and numeracy. This information will be useful for planning instructional strategies and targeting goals. Educational history. This includes the identification of the particular needs of students, consulting each student’s educational record, reading assessment reports or previous Individual Education Plans (IEPs), and becoming familiar with academic, psychological, or educational assessments. This information will help the teacher provide the kinds of learning supports that have been used successfully with that student in previous years. Socio-affective information. This includes the identification of affective, social, and personal development. Parents have an important role to play in this part of the profile. They know their child, and are essential partners in their child’s success.This information will be helpful for devising successful groups for collaborative learning projects. Why Develop a Class Profile? The teacher establishes a class profile first and foremost to collectively identify the strengths, challenges, and needs of all students and to determine the stage that each student has reached in his or her learning. Setting up a class profile is the first step in planning the teaching and the pedagogical intervention strategies for a given classroom. The teacher develops the class profile using an assessment of the students’ academic achievement in literacy and numeracy. In addition, because the class profile has an impact on all areas, the teacher does not limit it to the students’ academic level. It is also intended to identify: • students’ socio-affective development; • their interests and talents; • their current place in the learning process; • their perceptions about their learning; and • any details that parents have observed about their children. The class profile provides the teacher with the necessary elements for modifying the curriculum for individual students and making appropriate accommodations; for differentiating his or her teaching; for planning significant projects; and for meeting the personal needs of each student. It is a basis for planning centred on the strengths, challenges, individual characteristics, and similarities that the students share in the classroom. Armed with all of this information, the teacher can then help the students to work together and cooperate with one another. The teacher should develop the initial class profile at the beginning of the school year. She or he can draw from student profiles, which are also being drawn up in September by teachers, students, and parents. The teacher can then take all the information that has been provided and develop an educational plan. Critical Steps in the Development of a Class Profile 1. Gathering information on students. The teacher develops his or her class profile using parent and student questionnaires. In addition, the teacher selects and analyses numeracy and literacy activities, and makes diagnostic assessments of student achievement. The teacher may add data kept in each student’s school record to the profile. 2. Organizing the student information. The teacher summarizes strengths and areas of need related to literacy, numeracy, and social-behavioural issues, along with the programming implications (see Appendix 4-1). 3. Selecting instructional strategies and resources based on the class profile. The teacher identifies the strengths, needs, similar challenges, and interests of the students in the class. The teacher begins to identify those students who will benefit from similar modifications of the learning program, similar accommodations to the teaching, or similar interest-based topics. 4. Program planning and the implementation of universal design and differentiated instruction. The teacher considers the curriculum, the instructional strategies selected, the patterns in the class, and individual student profiles, and plans in light of these factors. The principles of universal design ensure that planning is flexible, supportive, and adjustable, and increases access to the curriculum by all students. The teacher identifies how he or she will modify curriculum expectations for individual students, provide appropriate accommodations, and select effective instructional approaches. 5. Program review and diagnosis of whole-class and individual student responses. The teacher takes into account the specific needs and strengths of all of the students, including those with special needs. Students learning should be monitored carefully so that the teacher is aware of each student’s response to specific instructional strategies and to the overall learning environment. As the teacher collects evidence of skill and knowledge acquisition by students, the efficacy of instructional strategies can be reviewed and teacher planning revised accordingly. 6. Consultation with the in-school team and out-of-school supports. Keeping in mind that strategies require adequate investment of time and persistence before a decision can be made about their effectiveness, the teacher may decide to seek further assistance regarding some students from the in-school team and out-of-school supports. The teacher works in collaboration with the in-school team to review the effectiveness of teaching strategies selected and/or to incorporate the recommendations made by out-of-school professionals. [Page 33 chart omitted] Why Develop an Individual Learning Profile? Classroom teachers may suspect that a student has special needs and choose to develop an individual learning profile for many reasons. They may have previously acquired information about the history of a student’s academic progress, or may be the first person to suspect that a student has special needs. They may observe that a student is experiencing particular difficulties with aspects of the curriculum and thus may wish to develop a more comprehensive picture of this student across all academic domains. They may also note that the student is exhibiting general behaviour problems such as poor attention to details, difficulty organizing work, and concentration problems. These behavioural difficulties have major implications for a student’s academic success (DuPaul et al., 2004; McGee, Piror, Williams, Smart, & Sanson, 2002; Rabiner & Coie, 2000; Todd et al., 2002). Steps in Creating an Individual Learning Profile In response to a concern about a particular student’s academic and/or behavioural difficulties, the teacher can create a learning profile focusing specifically on that student (see Appendix 4-2). This learning profile draws on a range of information sources such as: • information from the Ontario Student Record; • data gathered from parents, caregivers, and previous teachers; • observations of a student’s literacy and numeracy skills and general learning behaviours; • data from criterion-referenced assessment tools such as curriculum-based measures, reading inventories, work samples/portfolios, and tests. Some useful assessment instruments can be found in the Ministry of Education’s guides to effective instruction in reading and math (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2003a, 2003b), while others are available through other sources (e.g., Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario (LDAO) early assessment for reading; Paris, 2003); • psycho-educational reports, speech/language reports, diagnostic assessment data, medical reports, and so forth. After completing the data-gathering process, the teacher designs instruction for the student that takes into account the particular needs of the student and capitalizes on his or her strengths. One of the key pieces of information to be derived from the individual learning profile is the student’s current instructional level in the area(s) of difficulty. On the basis of this information, the teacher can provide instruction that directly targets the critical skills that the student needs. Essentially, the learning profile performs a “gap analysis” to determine where the child’s abilities are relative to the age-appropriate stage of development. There is considerable overlap between the steps in creating what we refer to in this report as an individual learning profile and the process for developing an Individual Education Plan (IEP) for a student. The information gathered for a student’s individual learning profile would likely become an important resource for the IEP development team. More detailed information on the development of an IEP can be found in The Individual Education Plan (IEP): A Resource Guide (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2004b). [Page 35 chart omitted] Relationship Between Inattention and Academic Achievement Research has shown that children with persistent behavioural difficulties, such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), are at considerable risk for academic underachievement (DuPaul et al., 2004; Hinshaw, 1992). Moreover, research strongly suggests that inattention symptoms, such as forgetfulness, tendency to lose things, difficulty staying on task – but not the symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity, such as restlessness and fidgetiness – are strongly associated with academic underachievement (Graetz, Sawyer, Hazell, Arney, & Baghurst, 2001; Merrill & Tymms, 2001; Rabiner & Coie, 2000; Todd et al., 2002). Children with ADHD will need interventions that address both their behavioural problems and their academic weaknesses. Many children with ADHD also have specific learning disorders in reading and/or mathematics (Tannock & Brown, 2000). For example, research has shown that between 15 and 40 per cent of children with ADHD also have reading disabilities. Moreover, research has also shown that children with reading disorder and ADHD exhibit the cognitive weaknesses associated with each disorder (Willcutt et al., 2001; Willcutt et al., in press). In other words, a child with co-occurring reading disorder and ADHD will have significant linguistic weaknesses (e.g., poor phonological processing abilities) and will exhibit the executive function weaknesses associated with ADHD (Barkley, 1997). In addition, research has shown that young children (in Kindergarten and Grade 1) with high levels of inattention symptoms are also at significant risk for academic underachievement in reading and mathematics (Merrill & Tymms, 2001; Rabiner & Coie, 2000; Rabiner, Malone, & Conduct Problems Prevention Group, 2004). For example, Rabiner and Coie found that children who were rated in Kindergarten as exhibiting attention problems were more likely than children without attention problems to exhibit weaknesses in reading in Grade 5 even after controlling for levels of hyperactivity, anxiety, other behaviour problems, and prior reading achievement. Hence, children who are inattentive in the early grades may be at particular risk for failing to develop critical reading skills even when they enter Kindergarten with relatively age-appropriate reading abilities (Rabiner & Coie; Rabiner et al.). Using a Psycho-educational Assessment to Develop an Individual Learning Profile The Expert Panel recognizes that knowledge about a student’s strengths and weaknesses in cognitive processing helps teachers provide appropriate instruction and accommodations for children in their classrooms. These instructional supports ensure equal access to instructional content for all children, particularly those with special education needs. Table 3 describes processing characteristics related to learning and how weaknesses in those processes can lead to difficulties in literacy and numeracy. It also identifies sections of this report that provide possible instructional strategies for students with weaknesses in these cognitive processes. It is worth noting that many children with special needs will have difficulties in more than one of these aspects of cognitive processing. Furthermore, some of these cognitive processes are interrelated. Information about cognitive profiles may come from psychological reports and other professional reports, and may be supported by information that a classroom teacher has collected in assessment and observation of students. All academic and cognitive recommendations that relate to the student’s program should be considered by the classroom teacher when generating an individual student profile. [Page 38 - 42 chart omitted] Appendix 4-1. Class Profile Templates 4-1A. Classroom Profile: Socio-Affective [Page 43 chart omitted] 4-1B. Classroom Profile: Literacy [Page 44-45 chart omitted] 4-1C. Classroom Profile: Mathematics [Page 46-47 chart omitted] Appendix 4-2. Individual Learning Profile Templates 4-2A. Oral Communication [Page 48 chart omitted] 4-2B. Reading [Page 49 chart omitted] 4-2C. Writing [Page 50 chart omitted] 4-2D. Mathematics [Page 51 chart omitted] Professional Learning Communities “The term professional learning community refers to a way of operating that emphasizes the importance of nurturing and celebrating the work of each individual staff person and of supporting the collective engagement of staff in such activities as the development of a shared vision of schooling and learning, capacity building, problem identification, learning, and problem resolution. It is an environment in which staff can learn continuously and continually increase their ability to create the environment they desire. “A professional learning community is exemplified by collaborative work that is grounded in reflective dialogue, in which staff have conversations about students, teaching, and learning, identifying related issues and problems and debating strategies that could bring about real change in the organizational culture.” (Ontario Ministry of Education, in press) The term professional learning community refers to a shared vision for running a school in which everyone can make a contribution, and staff are encouraged to collectively undertake activities and reflection in order to constantly improve their students’ performance. The participative nature of professional learning communities provides a setting for the implementation of integrated strategies and approaches for promoting learning, such as universal design. This method is an effective way to ensure success in literacy and numeracy for all students, including students with special needs. The concept of professional learning communities differs, however, from the concept of communities of learners, defined as follows: “The learning community includes school staff, students, parents, and community partners who are called on to work together at school improvement and at creating learning opportunities for students. An essential component to this is a structured school-community projects program whose activities are linked to school goals” (Epstein & Clark Salinas, 2004, p. 12). The Nature of Professional Learning Communities Members of a school who embrace the characteristics of a professional learning community will be able to achieve goals that they could not reach on their own (Dufour & Eaker, 1998). A school’s learning environment is enhanced by the cooperation of all concerned and by reflective dialogue where respectful exchanges of ideas on teaching, students, and learning facilitate debate about effective strategies (Hord, 1997). People exchange their points of view and constantly seek to learn. Collectively and collaboratively, they work together to promote positive results in students’ learning through consensus, sharing ideas, information, and materials. A professional learning community is based on the following principles and values (Danielson & McGreat, 2000; Levine & Shapiro, 2004): • A common impetus for change • A shared vision and common goals regarding the need for universal design in the school • The belief that all members of the school team are equal, which can lead to increased collaborative planning among staff to support the needs of special learners • The commitment of all team members to actions that improve student achievement, with focused support for students with special needs • An environment that encourages risk taking, where people are not afraid to comment and communicate their ideas for supporting students • The recognition by staff that professional inquiry is crucial, including disciplined and facilitated access of research-supported teaching strategies • Shared responsibility among staff members for students with special needs • Planning for assessment reflected in a school-wide action plan with indicators for achievement of objectives, including systematic and ongoing support structures for students with special needs Characteristics of professional learning communities • Shared vision and values that lead to a collective commitment of school staff, which is expressed in day-to-day practices • Solutions actively sought, openness to new ideas • Working teams cooperate to achieve common goals • Encouragement of experimentation as an opportunity to learn • Questioning of the status quo, leading to an ongoing quest for improvement and professional learning • Continuous improvement based on evaluation of outcomes rather than on the intentions expressed • Reflection in order to study the operation and impacts of actions taken (Dufour & Eaker, 1998; Levine & Shapiro, 2004) Why Promote Professional Learning Communities? Like any change or a new strategy, developing a professional learning community to foster the development of literacy and numeracy requires time and effort. The advantages are worth this initial work. They include: • Active participation of members in decision making • A collaborative choice of strategies that can be implemented to promote academic development • Concerted planning to implement those strategies the group chooses • Continuity in choice of strategies within a school, among classes at the same level, and between levels • Sharing of information and materials among members of the learning community • Shared responsibility for implementation of strategies • Discussions of the needs of students under the supervision of the learning community, so that the response to these needs is a responsibility shared by all • Information sharing for students’ transition from one school year to another (for example, discussion of students’ portfolios, so that it takes less time to get to know the students at the start of the school year) • Easier access to support • Sharing of duties for successful implementation of strategies: the teacher does not have the whole burden on his or her shoulders • Innovation and creativity According to several studies that have examined the effects of implementing a participative management method such as learning communities,3 the most notable impact is that participants develop a feeling of empowerment – a feeling that their strengths and skills are allied, that they have natural systems for mutual help, and that they engage in proactive behaviour when facing changes (Zimmerman & Rappaport, 1988). The researchers further noted that teachers felt: • less isolated when faced with complex tasks; • more confident in dealing with new, unfamiliar strategies; • more effective; • that they belonged to a group; • that change was possible and they could make a contribution; • increased self-confidence and self-esteem; • that their individual efforts would be supported by the group; • that they could experience leadership development. An organization that operates as a learning community relies on a culture of collegiality, which leads the principal and his or her teachers to work with obvious professionalism, and to work together as colleagues in a spirit of family, while showing mutual willingness to listen and confidence, seeking in this way to learn from one another in order to improve their potential, and the potential of the entire team. (Koffi, Laurin, & Moreau, 2000) Creating a Culture Favourable to a Professional Learning Community Eaker, Dufour, & Burnette (2002) suggest that the following conceptual framework can help schools along the complex path of establishing a professional learning community: • A solid foundation, developed collaboratively, made up of a mission, a vision, shared values, and the goal of student success • Interdependent teams working together towards common objectives • A results-oriented attitude, indicating commitment to continuous improvement Gather-Thurler (2000) has established some conditions that are favourable for initiating change in an organization, such as establishing a professional learning community in a school. They are classified under six dimensions, which are summarized in Table 4. This chart can be used as a tool to reflect on the mechanisms already in place in the school and to identify changes that need to be initiated. Table 4. Conditions for Organizational Change [Page 56 chart omitted] Suggestions for Getting Started A multidisciplinary team, comprised of members with different duties within the school, in consultation with all school personnel and with parents and students, can work together as a team to collectively achieve consensus around priority values and the school’s values, vision, and mission. The team reviews the characteristics of a professional learning community and the school’s current capacity, and then develops a school plan. This plan needs to support the school board’s plan for literacy and numeracy, and includes a strategy to implement clearly stated actions that will help students with special needs succeed in literacy and numeracy. Next, staff can meet to develop common objectives and actions that will help them achieve the goals and objectives set out in the school plan. They should plan to meet regularly during the school year to assess these goals and objectives using measurable success indicators, and to monitor and modify their plan. Time for discussion among staff from all divisions ensures a continuum of achievement of the goals. Ongoing monitoring of the school’s capacity is important. Teams should be able to work in an interdependent manner, allowing time for discussion among staff from different grades to ensure a continuum in the achievement of the goals that have been identified and also to ensure harmonious and productive transitions from one grade to another and from one division to another. A fully developed professional learning community requires the commitment and support of the school board. Resources will need to be made available to ensure all staff have opportunities to work as an effective team. The Role of the Principal Success in setting up a professional learning community in a school depends a great deal on the leadership style of the school’s principal. Principals of professional learning communities need to facilitate and encourage: • a school culture in which members care deeply about the success of all students; • a collaborative culture among the teachers that sustains continuous improvement in the service of all students; • individualized support for teachers based on their needs; • support staff, district and community resources, and professional development to assist teachers; • a “can-do” attitude among staff, a sense of efficacy, and optimism about the students with special needs; • a culture of disciplined entrepreneurship and collective self-efficacy; • the coordination of school programs that are focused on learning and sustained over time; • a focus on learning; • timely and regular monitoring of each student’s learning. Questions to ask when setting up a learning community • Where do we want to go? • Who is working with us? • What do we want to achieve as soon as possible and what can wait? • What do we need to invest? • What skills do we need to develop before starting? • How will we monitor our progress? • How and when will we know if we have achieved our objectives? • What mechanisms for cooperation should be instituted to decide on adjustments to be undertaken? • Is the project concerned only acceptable to, and accepted by, those who conceived it, or do the people who are supposed to cooperate in its implementation (students, parents, school authorities) also support it? • Is there support for scheduling ongoing meetings where information is communicated, strategies are exchanged, problems are shared, and common solutions are developed? (Gather-Thurler, 2000; Koffi et al., 2000) Research to Practice: What Works for Both Literacy and Numeracy “… constructing teaching practices on a firm scientific foundation does not mean denying the craft aspects of teaching.” (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2003, p. 3) The Importance of Basing Instruction on Evidence-based Instructional Practices Educational research seeks to determine the nature and type of instructional components that are effective in improving the literacy and numeracy skills of a wide range of learners, including learners with special needs. There is an extensive body of research regarding best practices for literacy instruction (Expert Panel on Early Reading in Ontario, 2003; Expert Panel on Literacy in Grades 4 to 6 in Ontario, 2004; National Reading Panel, 2000), and research on numeracy instruction has made considerable gains in the past years regarding the identification of key instructional components for facilitating numeracy in students with and without special needs (Expert Panel on Early Math in Ontario, 2003; Expert Panel on Mathematics in Grades 4 to 6in Ontario, 2004; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2001). This research can provide teachers with a roadmap that highlights effective teaching techniques for all students. It is a roadmap we should pay attention to, because one of its most sobering findings is the evidence demonstrating the significant lack of progress that students with special needs in literacy or numeracy exhibit when not receiving a program based on research-supported instructional components. It is critical that instructional practices for all students reflect the best of what is available. A growing body of research indicates that the following classroom-level practices are effective for all learners, but are particularly beneficial for students with special needs in literacy and/or numeracy. The Tiered Approach to Early Identification and Intervention As outlined in earlier chapters on assessment and learning profiles, frequent and accurate assessment, evaluation, and progress monitoring by the classroom teacher comprise the engine that drives change in instruction to meet the needs of all students (see Lyon, Fletcher, Fuchs, & Chhabra, in press). An extremely effective approach to assessment and intervention is the “tiered” approach, which sequentially increases the intensity of instructional interventions (Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003). It promotes and facilitates early identification of students who are at risk, and therefore prevents learning difficulties. In addition, this approach ensures adequate interventions for students exhibiting persistent learning difficulties (Vaughn et al., 2003). For best outcomes, it should begin in Kindergarten, as students who are at risk can be identified early and provided with the appropriate intensity of instruction to prevent later persistent difficulties (Vaughn, Linan-Thompson, & Hickman, 2003). The use of the “tiered” approach in the early years has been shown to dramatically reduce the number of students in the later grades who would meet criteria for learning disabilities (O’Connor, 2000; Vaughn et al.). The first tier consists of sound classroom instruction, based on successful practice for all students. Assessment in this tier is classroom-based and involves the teacher monitoring the progress of the class and flagging any at-risk students. The classroom and individual learning profiles described in this report would be useful tools for the teacher to use to monitor student progress, plan differentiated instructional strategies, and identify at-risk learners. The second tier requires teachers to identify students who have failed to progress satisfactorily in tier 1 instruction. Tier 2 involves more intensive instruction (individually or in small groups) in addition to the tier 1 programming. This level of instruction may include other members of the school staff (e.g., special education teacher, teacher’s assistants). The third tier is for students who do not respond to instructional efforts in tiers 1 and 2. These students may need to be referred for more extensive psycho-educational assessment. This type of assessment information, coupled with classroom observations and teacher assessment of the students’ previous responses to intervention strategies, can then be used to guide more specialized instruction. The success of this approach is dependent upon the teachers receiving adequate professional development in teacher-based assessment practices, progress monitoring, and intervention strategies for students with special needs (Lyon et al., in press). Such professional development is particularly important for teachers working in the very early grades who are on the front lines in terms of identifying children who are at risk for learning difficulties. Essential Instructional Components for Both Literacy and Numeracy Knowing whether or not a student is exhibiting problems in literacy and/or numeracy (Lyon et al., in press) may in many cases be more useful than knowing that the student has a specific diagnosis (e.g., learning disability). Once a teacher identifies a child’s current level of functioning in a given component of literacy and/or numeracy, the teacher can plan instruction that promotes achievement in this area. The importance of determining a student’s current level of functioning is evident in L.S. Vygotsky’s concept of the “zone of proximal development”. According to Vygotsky (1980), a student’s current level of achievement is the zone of actual development. Teachers should aim to help students move towards the next level of development – the zone of proximal development. Instructional supports, which can include collaborative and supportive interactions between a student and a more knowledgeable other, help students bridge the gap between what they know and what they do not know. In addition to providing instruction in those aspects of the curriculum that are critical to the development of literacy or numeracy skills (e.g., phonemic awareness), instructional researchers have also identified several essential instructional components that are particularly important when instructing students with special needs. Instruction must be of sufficient duration and intensity to produce adequate learning and application to new situations. Students with special needs may require interventions of longer duration and intensity than other students in order to achieve mastery of both foundational and higher-level skills (e.g., Blachman et al., 2004). Research has shown that students with special needs may need more learning opportunities distributed over a longer time to make sufficient gains. In addition, students with special needs may need instruction that is of greater intensity (e.g., more small-group or peer-assisted learning activities). Teachers can make decisions regarding the intensity and duration of instructional components by carefully monitoring progress (e.g., using curriculum-based measurement tools) and thereby gauging a student’s response to instruction. Students with special needs benefit from cumulative review of important concepts and skills. Cumulative review of previously mastered content promotes retention. Early in the learning of a new skill, children are error-prone, not very fluent, and inconsistent in their application of skills to new situations. Children with special needs, in particular, can be more error-prone and less fluent or consistent for longer periods of time than their classmates. Hence, these children may need more opportunities to practise their skills and to review prior learning. Cumulative review should also be judicious review (reviewing key skills and concepts that are not consolidated) and should incorporate a wide range of activities. For example, students who struggle with learning letter– sound relationships may need to continually review previously learned sounds and sight words (Blachman et al., 2004). These reviews can be quick oral reviews (e.g., “Tell me the following sounds for these letters.”) or perhaps a short activity or structured game targeting the skill. Students with special needs require guided practice to help them bridge the gap between what they know and don’t know, and they need to receive explicit instruction in how to apply learned information in new situations. Students with special needs are particularly in need of guided practice and specific instruction that helps them transfer their skills to new problem-solving contexts and to situations that present new content, but require previously taught skills (Baker, Gersten, & Scanlon, 2002; Fuchs et al., 2003a, 2003b). Teachers need to monitor their instructional language (both oral and written). They should ensure that they use the appropriate level of explicitness when communicating with students, provide concrete examples, fully elaborate on concepts, provide feedback that guides student thinking, and provide explicit error correction or positive feedback (Englert, Raphael, Anderson, Anthony, & Stevens, 1991; Foorman & Torgesen, 2001). Instruction needs to integrate both foundation skills (e.g., word decoding) and higherorder processes (e.g., monitoring for understanding) concurrently for students to be able to apply their knowledge and skills. Whether it is reading or mathematics, students need systematic instruction to achieve fluency in foundational skills such as computational procedures and decoding if they are to achieve proficiency in higher-order skills. At the same time, however, students need to receive instruction that also targets higher-order skills such as problem-solving and comprehension strategies. For example, a student may lack word-recognition skills, and hence these weaknesses need to be a focus of instruction. In addition, however, the student should be taught comprehension strategies to help him or her understand text (e.g., the teacher could model the strategies when reading aloud from a more advanced text). Students benefit from clear, organized teaching that makes explicit connections across previous and current content areas. Students need clear instruction on basic skills and procedures as well as on the use of higher-order strategies and metacognitive principles that promote and consolidate learning (Swanson, 1999). Specific Instructional Strategies Supported by Research There are a variety of specific teaching strategies that can facilitate learning across multiple academic domains, including written expression, reading comprehension, decoding, and math problem solving. The instructional strategies described below encompass teaching techniques such as scaffolding, modelling, supportive instructional language, and guided practice as well as concrete tools for students to use, such as cue cards (Rosenshine & Meister, 1992). Instructional strategies also include providing students with a “plan of action” regarding a particular task or cognitive process, such as monitoring for understanding (Baker et al., 2002). Students benefit greatly when teachers use instructional strategies in an integrated fashion. Instruction in higher-order cognitive thinking processes, for instance, could incorporate modelling, guided practice, and concrete prompts. Scaffolding Scaffolding is a term used to refer to a number of specific instructional strategies that a teacher can use, all of which have two interrelated goals: to move the student from one place to another in terms of learning, and to gradually transfer the responsibility for learning from the teacher to the student, thereby fostering a more independent learner. Scaffolding proceeds from the assumption that the learning task is located in the student’s zone of proximal development. It therefore entails temporary and adjustable supports and guidance. These are gradually phased out as the student demonstrates competence with the concepts or procedures being taught. Hence, scaffolds can include such diverse activities as teachers activating background knowledge, providing prompts or think sheets, or facilitating guided practice. Teachers can use the following eight essential elements of scaffolded instruction interactively to support student learning and provide students with the cognitive and emotional support they need to successfully learn new skills or strategies:4 1. Engage in preplanning. Teachers develop classroom and individual learning profiles, then select appropriate tasks by considering the goals of the curriculum as well as students’ needs. 2. Establish a shared goal. Students and teachers work together to identify instructional goals. For example, the student and the teacher may identify a goal to work towards for a given type of skill, such as the ability to read an independent-level text aloud without errors. 3. Identify student needs and monitor progress. Teachers must be sensitive to students’ needs and current level of knowledge, and frequently monitor progress and understanding. 4. Provide tailored assistance. Teachers use a range of instructional supports or scaffolds to provide needed support, and adjust these supports as needed. 5. Maintain pursuit of the goal. Teachers help students remain focused on the goal through questioning and dialogue and by providing emotional support (i.e., praise and encouragement). 6. Give feedback. Teachers provide specific feedback that highlights student progress and specific behaviours that contributed to success. 7. Control for frustration and risk. Teachers create a learning environment that is not beyond what a student can accomplish and one in which students feel comfortable taking risks. 8. Assist internalization, independence, and generalization. Teachers provides students with sufficient opportunities to internalize a task or process, and gradually phase out support. Teachers can help students generalize their learning by identifying other contexts where they can apply the process and actively encouraging the students to practise the task or process in these contexts. Modelling Modelling can take on a number of forms. Teachers can “think aloud ”. They can overtly verbalize the thought processes used to complete a particular activity. Research has shown that when teachers use think-aloud techniques to demonstrate the cognitive processes related to the writing process, students improve in their ability to write expository text (Englert et al., 1991). Similarly, teachers can use think-aloud techniques to model how a reader processes text (Gunning, 1996). Teachers can model learning strategies. For example, by modelling good reading strategies the teacher makes explicit those skills that cannot be readily perceived by the students. Students can also be invited to think out loud and model their strategies for decoding words, making predictions, summarizing, and evaluating text. 4. Hogan and Pressley’s (1997) eight essential elements of scaffolded instruction, outlined in Larkin (2001). Teachers can demonstrate the task. The teacher may, for example, demonstrate all the steps in completing a graphic organizer or show the steps that students need to take to solve a specific type of math problem (e.g., Fuchs et al., 2003b). Instructional language Language of instruction refers to the oral language used in the classroom to instruct and communicate expectations. It also includes the print-based materials used in the class to communicate content and instructions. Teachers can modify and/or expand upon the language of instruction in a variety of ways in order to more effectively communicate important information about procedures and concepts to be learned. As well, language can be used to support and encourage independent learning in students with special educational needs. Sometimes, these students will need to hear ideas reformulated in different ways and will benefit from multiple opportunities to listen to the teacher. Teachers can provide important tips, cues, and explicit feedback in the form of interactive dialogue, thus acting as the students’ coach (Englert et al., 1991). Teachers can vary the complexity of their language of instruction (oral and written), via the number/amount, sequence, and/or complexity of instructions or information. They can, for instance, explicitly state themes rather than have students infer them, vary pacing, and elaborate and review key ideas (Lapadat, 2002). For example, teachers may need to: • simplify and shorten instructions (often visual reminders/cues are useful); • provide concrete examples of more abstract concepts; • use analogies; • present new information with an emphasis on main ideas and provide clear conceptual links between key ideas and supporting details. Guided practice The teacher can provide students with support and guidance as they initially learn new information or tasks, and then gradually phase out this support as the students become more proficient. Guided practice is critically important to many effective instructional programs, including those targeting mathematical problem solving (Fuchs et al., 2003b), written expression (e.g., Baker, Gersten, & Graham, 2003), and word-recognition skills (Lovett, Lacerenza, & Borden, 2000). Guided practice is an important way to prevent students from forming misconceptions (Rosenshine, 1997). Some students may come to the task lacking in prior knowledge and may be overwhelmed by the complexity or amount of new information. Other students may have limited working memory capacity or poor language skills and thus will also struggle to process the information that is presented. Guided practice helps students understand and clarify task expectations and facilitates their ability to link new knowledge with existing concepts. How to conduct guided practice 1. The students and the teacher work together to perform the task. Students can contribute to the task (for instance, solve a particular step of a math problem), but they are not required to perform the entire task independently. 2. Students work in small groups or with a partner. Once some proficiency is gained, the students begin to practise the task more independently but still receive supportive feedback regarding their progress as they complete the task. 3. Students engage in independent practice to promote mastery and automaticity. (Based on Expert Panel on Early Reading, 2003; Expert Panel on Literacy in Grades 4 to 6, 2004) Strategy instruction Independent and successful learners tend to use a broad array of strategies to solve problems and mediate their own learning. Some students, however, may lack knowledge of effective learning strategies or may require more structure and guidance to exhibit selfregulatory and strategic behaviour. Teachers can provide these students with an outline of the critical steps in a task or process and how they should sequence or integrate these steps, via strategies or “action plans” that highlight efficient and effective ways to perform complex tasks such as composing expository text. Providing students with instruction in “how to learn” enables students to become more efficient learners. Moreover, the action plan provides an organizational structure that helps the student focus on carrying out the task rather than trying to think about what to do next while also trying to implement the process (Baker et al., 2003). With repeated practice and instruction that utilizes other important instructional supports (e.g., teacher modelling, concrete representations), a student will begin to internalize the action plan and as a result become a more independent and strategic learner. Research suggests that instruction in the use of strategies is most effective when it is explicit, especially when working with students with special learning needs (e.g., Kamil et al., 2000; National Reading Panel, 2000). Students benefit from instruction that provides them with knowledge of the types of tools and techniques that can be used to learn new information, integrate information, or communicate information (Baker et al., 2002). Significantly, research has also shown that students need to have knowledge of the specific types of thinking or strategic approaches used within a given academic domain (Baker et al., 2002). For example, it is important for students to learn the critical strategies relevant to comprehending texts (e.g., clarifying or summarization) and those strategies relevant to creating text (e.g., how to plan, organize, and revise). Teachers can also facilitate student achievement by teaching students why a particular strategy is important, when and where to use it, and how to evaluate its use (Baker et al.; Billingsly & Wildman, 1990). Components of explicit strategy instruction • State process and content objectives. • Provide information about when and where to use the strategy. • Provide students with a rationale for using the strategy. • Provide students with a personal learning story related to strategy use. • Model using the strategy –think-aloud. • Provide students with guided instruction – scaffold. • Provide students with evidence of strategy effectiveness. • Cue students for transfer and generalization. (Woloshyn et al., 2001) It is also important to recognize that explicit strategy instruction in reading can unfold in a variety of reading contexts (Au, Carroll, & Scheu, 2001; Stahl & Hayes, 1997). For instance, guided and shared reading provide educators with opportunities to model literacy strategies and scaffold students’ use of literacy strategies. Independent reading allows students with opportunities to practise these skills in a self-directed manner, with read-alouds providing educators with opportunities to monitor students’ independent use of literacy strategies. During each reading activity, educators need to be responsive to the students’ learning needs and performances and be flexible with respect to instructional venue. For instance, if during a read-aloud, a teacher observes that a student is using a strategic approach inappropriately (e.g., using irrelevant knowledge to make predictions), he or she may want to revert to a guided reading session where appropriate strategy use can be modelled (e.g., activation of relevant background information). In other words, educators need to be flexible in their decision making based on the knowledge of instructional methodologies, students’ learning profiles, and students’ response to instruction. Concrete Instructional Tools That Support Student Learning Children with special needs may better encode and retrieve new information if it is presented in a structured way (e.g., graphic organizer, advance organizer) (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). In addition, students with special learning needs may have difficulty retrieving information from memory and thus may benefit from cueing strategies to help them recall specific procedures, routines, or academic information they have successfully encoded but cannot retrieve, such as asking them to select the right answer from a list, providing checklists of key activities to complete, or providing procedural facilitators (see Baker et al., 2002, and the findings of McNamara & Wong, 2003). In addition, concrete instructional supports also tend to reduce the processing load on the learner. Graphic aids can include “think sheets” (e.g., Englert et al., 1991), cue cards and prompts (e.g., Vaughn & Klinger, 1999), or posters. For example, Fuchs et al. (2003b) incorporated the use of posters to remind students of the steps needed to solve different problem types in their instructional treatment programs targeting mathematical problem-solving skills. In addition, Fuchs et al. used posters to help students identify the ways in which problems can change. Teachers can also provide students with a concrete analogy or picture of an abstract or difficult concept. Lovett, Lacerenza, and Borden (2000) describe the following strategy-based decoding program in which visual aids are used to support the use of specific word-decoding strategies. To support the strategy “Vowel Alert”, the teacher provided students with a visual support in the form of a Vowel Alert stoplight. This cue reminds students that they need to stop (red light), be cautious (yellow light) and try both sounds, such as a long “a” sound and short “a” sound, and then go (green light) once they get the sound that gives them the correct word. A graphic organizer is a visual aid that can be helpful in demonstrating how concepts are connected or related to students who may not have well-organized prior knowledge or have difficulty in making inferences or understanding the relationships among main ideas and details. They provide students with a visual depiction of the relationship between superordinate and subordinate concepts (DiCecco & Gleason, 2002). Research on teaching higher-order cognitive strategies has also highlighted the value of providing students with acronyms and visual prompts of the key steps in a complex activity. The acronyms POW (Pick an Idea, Organize Notes, and Write and Say More), for instance, has been shown to help students in writing an expository text (Harris, Graham, & Mason, 2002). These cues can be on a poster or on a think sheet that the students can refer to when developing their text. In addition to providing the students with a concrete reminder of the critical processes or steps, they also provide students and teachers with a common language to discuss the process (Baker et al., 2002). Involving Students in the Learning Process For both reading and mathematics, instructional strategies that increase the amount of time that the student is engaged in the learning process are effective for all students, particularly those with special needs. The following instructional strategies have been shown to be particularly useful in improving the learning of students with special needs. Peer-assisted learning strategies (PALS) Peer-assisted learning strategies (PALS) provide students with effective opportunities to be engaged in the learning process (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Karn, 2001; Mathes, Howard, Allen, & Fuchs, 1998). PALS has been effectively used to boost students’ reading and mathematics achievement (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons, 1997; Fuchs, Fuchs, Yazdian, & Powell, 2002; Mathes et al.). PALS permits the teacher to “pair students together to work intensively on structured activities that are appropriate to individual needs” (Fuchs et al., 2002, p.569). PALS is an effective technique for taking advantage of mixed-ability grouping, and can be used with students from Kindergarten to high school. It enhances both new skill learning and transfer of those skills to new problem-solving situations, and increases feelings of self-efficacy for all learners (Lyon et al., in press). Research suggests that putting students with similar achievement levels into a group separate from the rest of the class is detrimental to students with special needs and does little for high-achieving students, if the same curriculum is being delivered to all students (Whitehurst, 2003). Key components of PALS are: • structured interactions between partners; • frequent interaction and feedback between partners; and • role reciprocity (each student has the opportunity to act as the tutor). In other words, PALS does not simply involve putting students together and asking them to help each other. It is the structured peer relationships and the playing of different roles by each student in PALS that lead to positive outcomes. Prior to beginning the PALS lessons, the teacher explicitly instructs students in the components of PALS (e.g., rules, coach’s job, player’s job, error correction procedures) using brief scripted lessons (see Mathes et al., 1998, for an example involving instruction in reading). Significantly, this research has mainly been conducted in heterogeneous classrooms with students of a range of abilities, and there is evidence that PALS results in significant growth for low-achieving, average, and high-achieving students (Fuchs et al., 1997, 2002). Thus, PALS provides teachers with strategies for differentiating instruction to address the range of academic needs in their classrooms. For example, Fuchs et al. (2002) used PALS to enhance Grade 1 students’ mathematical development. In this study, teachers used PALS three times a week for 30 minutes each time for 16 weeks. High-achieving students were paired with low-achieving students for three weeks and then pairings were switched every three weeks to provide children with exposure to a range of partners. At the beginning of each session the teacher reviewed/taught the key math concepts that were to be the focus of the PALS session for that day. For each session, the stronger student acted as the coach first. Halfway through the session, the students switched roles and the player became the coach and vice versa. The results showed that those students who received the enhanced PALS program did significantly better on the targeted math topics than students receiving the same math curriculum without the PALS components. Self-regulation strategies Self-regulated learning is a goal for all students. One of its key aspects is that the student becomes able to self-assess his or her learning (Paris & Paris, 2001). Hence, students should be encouraged to take an active role in the learning process and evaluate their levels of understanding, personal interests, and the types of strategies used to complete a task. Students can monitor their progress and note the association between actions (e.g., effort, use of a particular strategy) and outcome (increased ability, reaching goals). In turn, this can promote students’ self-efficacy (Paris & Paris). The research indicates that self-regulated learning instruction can augment strategic instruction in written composition for children with special needs (Sawyer, Graham, & Harris, 1992) and can promote students’ ability to apply knowledge, skills, and strategies to novel mathematical problems (Fuchs et al., 2003b). Teachers can explicitly teach self-regulation through overt instruction and directed reflection, and/or promote it indirectly through modelling and activities that involve aspects of self-regulation. Self-regulation instructional components can include student goal setting (daily, weekly) and teaching students how to monitor progress (e.g., providing students with tools to graph daily progress). Research suggests that students with special needs learn at a faster rate when they set their learning goals and when they can see the progress they are making towards those goals through graphing of progress. Providing Comprehensive Instruction That Focuses Specifically on Weak Academic Skills All students require evidence-based instructional programs and teaching strategies that directly target their specific weak academic skills – including their academic needs in literacy and numeracy. Instruction should be comprehensive (Lyon et al., in press), because students with special needs do not generalize learning to new situations or domains easily. For example, for many students who are poor readers, intensive and systematic instruction in word-recognition skills can improve decoding skills, though subsequent gains in fluency are not as evident (e.g., Torgesen et al., 2001). Similarly, although gains in word recognition can improve comprehension to some degree, students may still need specific instruction in reading comprehension strategies to make the greatest gains (Lyon et al.). Hence, gains are often specific to what is taught. There is no evidence that providing students with special needs with instructional programs that do not specifically focus on their specific academic needs is effective. For example, targeting motor skills, self-esteem, learning styles, and brain-based learning will not improve academic skills in and of themselves. A critical finding from the research is the fact that student achievement is highly related to instructional practices. Simply put, when students receive instruction that reflects “successful practices” they demonstrate significantly greater growth in targeted domains than students who are not receiving “best practice” instruction (Blachman et al., 2004; Foorman, Francis, Fletcher, Schatschneider, & Mehta, 1998; Graves, Gersten, & Haager, 2004). These findings underscore the need for teachers to use research-based knowledge to guide their instructional decision making. Such a foundation will facilitate their ability to provide optimal learning opportunities for all students in their classes (O’Connor, 2004; Stanovich & Stanovich, 2003). Effective Instructional Approaches and Teaching Strategies for Numeracy “An effective mathematics program should include a variety of problem-solving experiences and a balanced array of pedagogical approaches. An essential aspect of an effective mathematics program is balance (Kilpatrick, Swafford, & Findell, 2001).” (Expert Panel on Mathematics in Grades 4 to 6 in Ontario, 2004, p. 7). Difficulties in mathematics are as common as difficulties in reading. Math difficulties co-occur in about half of all children who have learning difficulties in other domains such as reading, writing, and oral language (Fleishner, 1994; Shalev, Auerbach, Manor, & Gross-Tsur, 2000). Despite these facts, research on why some children have difficulty acquiring math skills is less well developed than similar research on the origins of reading difficulties. As well, there is less research on the efficacy of instructional programs in mathematics and effective math interventions; reading programs outnumber mathematics programs 6 to 1 (Whitehurst, 2003). Guiding Principles To effectively teach mathematics to a classroom of learners that includes students with special needs, teachers need to understand the following: • The teacher plays a critical role in student success in mathematics. • There are general principles of children’s learning of mathematics. • The mathematics curriculum is developmental. • The “big ideas” are key concepts of mathematics. • There is an important connection between procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding of mathematics. • The use of concrete materials is fundamental to learning and provides a means of representing concepts and student understanding. • The teaching and learning process involves ongoing assessment. The role of the teacher5 “Knowledge of mathematics includes (a) understanding the meaning, principles, and processes of a wide range of mathematics appropriate to the needs of the students; (b) recognizing unusual performance on the part of a student and how to adapt activities to determine the basis for this performance; and (c) knowing the developmental characteristics of the student in such detail that individualized curriculum choices can be made as to when it is an appropriate time to present certain mathematics to a student, the sequence in which it should be presented, the intensity or length of time one will stay with a topic to assure mastery, the mixture of mathematics that should be presented, and how to determine that a student has attained proficiency and mastery of the principles.” (Parmar & Cawley, 1998, p. 225) More than in any other subject area, students’ progress in mathematics is closely linked to the teacher’s knowledge about children’s mathematical development and teacher preparation in the teaching of mathematics (Ginsburg, Klein, & Starkey, 1998). A teacher with a sound understanding of the mathematics content, together with a knowledge of how students learn best, is equipped to provide experiences that meet the needs of all learners. The teacher is the child’s most important role model for mathematics learning, and so it is crucial that he or she adopt a knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and positive attitude towards mathematics and its applications (Mercer & Mercer, 1998). Several studies show a relationship between a student’s attitude towards mathematics and achievement in mathematics (Dossey, Mullis, Lindquist, & Chambers, 1998). How children learn mathematics “Many elements must be acknowledged about the early learner of mathematics.These include recognition of the developmental aspects of learning, the importance of building on prior mathematical understanding, and the essential fact that children learn mathematices primarily through ‘… doing, talking, reflecting, discussing, observing, investigating, listening, and reasoning’ (Copley, 2000, p. 29).” (Expert Panel on Early Math in Ontario, 2003, p. 7) Children need time and a variety of contexts to learn and consolidate mathematical concepts and procedures. Children can, for instance, practise addition facts in a variety of ways throughout the instructional year by solving problems in context, playing games, using manipulatives, using visual aides (ten frames, dot cards, flash cards), and completing worksheets. Children with special needs often require additional time, many concrete experiences in different contexts, and extra guidance from the teacher to understand and demonstrate their mathematical knowledge. 5. Expert Panel on Early Math in Ontario (2003), pp. 7–11, provides information about children’s early mathematical development, the role of the teacher in mathematics education, and how teachers can use a child’s pre-existing mathematical knowledge to facilitate new learning in mathematics. The nature of the mathematics curriculum More than in any other subject area, later learning in mathematics is closely tied to prior learning. As students move through the primary and junior grades, the mathematics content becomes increasingly sophisticated and abstract. Arithmetic concepts and skills learned in primary grades, for instance, lead to algebra skills in later years; data management concepts broaden to include more data analysis and probability (Expert Panel on Mathematics in Grades 4 to 6, 2004, p. 1). Students require prerequisite skills to learn the new, more sophisticated and abstract concepts and skills, and are expected to demonstrate a higher level of proficiency with each passing year. Teachers need to work closely with students to help them avoid falling behind. Before students can understand and work with fractions, for instance, they need many experiences with whole numbers. If students fail to develop a conceptual understanding at an early stage, they will continue to have difficulties learning new concepts until foundational concepts have been mastered. The focus on “big ideas” in mathematics “Teaching that uses big ideas or key concepts allows students to make connections instead of seeing mathematics as disconnected ideas.” (Expert Panel on Early Math, 2003, p. 16) Teaching “big ideas” allows the teacher to focus his or her planning and instruction on important mathematical concepts and provides teachers and students alike with a global view of the concepts in the strand. For example, when studying geometry, instruction could focus on the big idea of the relationship between 2D shapes and 3D figures (e.g., a cube has six square faces). When studying number sense and numeration, one big idea on which to focus instruction would be different counting strategies (e.g., counting all, counting on, skip counting). A Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics, Kindergarten to Grade 3: Number Sense and Numeration (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2003a) provides a more complete description of big ideas. Big ideas also act as a lens for: • making instructional decisions (e.g., deciding on an emphasis for a lesson or a set of lessons); • identifying prior learning; • looking at students’ thinking and understanding in relation to the mathematical concepts addressed in the curriculum (e.g., making note of the strategy a student uses to count a set); • collecting observations and making anecdotal records; • providing feedback to students; • determining next steps; • communicating concepts and providing feedback on student achievement to parents (e.g., in report card comments).6 6. A Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics, Kindergarten to Grade 3 (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2004a), p. 2.13. The link between procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding “Conceptual understanding helps students with long-term understandings; procedural knowledge helps students to connect conceptual understanding with symbolic language.” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2004a, p. 2.4) Mathematics instruction should focus on the rules and symbols of mathematics (procedural knowledge) and the understanding of concepts and the ability to see relationships (conceptual understanding). An example of procedural knowledge is knowing how to add and subtract; the related conceptual understanding is the recognition of all that is connected to the concept of addition – that it could mean combining two sets, is the reverse operation of subtraction, and is commutative. The link between procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding is more fully explained in A Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics, Kindergarten to Grade 3 (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2004a, pp. 2.4–2.5). Children with special needs show the most growth in mathematical understanding when instruction concurrently addresses both procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding. In general, whole-class instruction in mathematics has been shown to be effective when both procedural skills and conceptual knowledge are explicitly targeted for instruction; this type of instruction improves outcomes for children across ability levels and grades (e.