Started by looking at how I taught. Noticed that I taught for the middle with not much differentiation for the upper and lower levels. Lower learning kids I provided more assistance and scaffolding and for identified special ed kids I followed their plans. For the higher kids I just had higher expectations of performance. So I started researching how to improve how I differentiated instruction, and I came across literature that said that students would be able to help provide the best feedback on how they learn in order to improve instruction. In essence giving students a voice in how the learning is achieved.
I used both hands on learning styles for both cycles because the class is a laboratory science. The first cycle was mainly passive learning with more lecture and notes as well as the hands on labs. The second cycle built on data form the first cycle and was more student centered research and critical thinking. In the first cycle I was surprised that the students liked video notes but it showed that they did not learn enough as almost all failed the assessment. The second cycle showed more retention of material. I think this is due to the students having more of a say in how they learned the material. I used simulations and labs and debates and student centered discussions. Students were given the choice on how they turned in assignments. I paired lower level students with higher-level students to add responsibility to the higher kids and add comfort to lower kids since some are afraid of asking for help. One main surprise for the second cycle was how many more students turned in assignments. And how many more were working on things at home.
I have listed 2 places to publish but I am now not sure of AACE. I would like to publish in Edutopia because it is a sharing place by other educators, and am not sure where else.
Link to actual paper: files.me.com/wiyonmuks/05ove5
No comments:
Post a Comment