As I work to employ technological tools designed to help me meet the principles of Universal Design for Learning and provide differentiated instruction, I know that I must always consider, at the very least, my students’ abilities, interests, and readiness to learn. Then, I must craft learning experiences that allow each student to be successful. This is a monumental task – one that I do not take likely. Through my engagement in this course, I have become aware of some tools that are readily available to assist me in my quest to meet the needs of all students. This course has reminded me of the importance of challenging all students. In many ways, I’ve sometimes thought of differentiating instruction as “watering down” the content so that everyone in the class can “pass.” I have increased my awareness of the need to provide appropriate levels of challenge for all students, including those who lag behind, those who are advanced, and those who are right in the middle.
A review of resources available to me has caused me to stop and think about my role as the teacher. I have experimented with various instructional delivery methods, trying to address auditory learners, visual learners, and kinesthetic learners. I have also experimented with using the tools in my classroom to address specific learning needs. Not every student spends time in every center. Not every center needs to have the same activities available day to day. In addition to planning for various learning styles, I have also begun to develop plans for assessing students by having them create a variety of projects. I believe I am making real progress in assessing mastery as opposed to recall. The tools found in the UDL toolkit have been very helpful in my quest to meet the goal of empowering students and assessing the learning that has taken place as the result of my efforts. I know that this is an area that I will continue to work to improve. I sometimes find it difficult to explain assessment to parents who sometimes expect teachers to use “cookie cutter” procedures. As I grow my skills in addressing differentiated instruction, assessment remains an area that I need to work on improving.
Because I work in a school where most of the population seldom travels outside of the community, I realize the need to explain the processes and procedures I use in my classroom to parents. I also believe that through the web 2.0 tools that I have experimented with as a part of this course that I can engage my students in creating projects that will essentially “wow” parents. I believe as parents begin to understand my rationale for engaging students in a variety of projects, that they will support my efforts. I also hope that by sharing student work with parents more often that parents begin to talk with their children more readily about what is going on in their classroom. Hopefully this will lead to improved interest and performance.
One frustration I have mentioned time and time again is the lack of access to many of the on-line tools that facilitate learning. I hope to become an advocate for allowing teachers access to these tools. In addition, another step I plan to employ is an expansion in the use of pretests to determine where my students are as we begin new units of study. Too often, I have found myself assuming that my students are on grade level or have an understanding of prerequisite skills (such as those associated with math) only to learn that they have not mastered those skills. Pretests can provide me with valuable information and allow me to optimize my instructional time.
This course has reaffirmed many of the beliefs I held previously. It has also made me aware of tools and provided me with some challenges for more effective student engagement.
