Implementing Inclusive Classsrooms
Quote: Students need to master the basics, and skill drills support that need. But learners also need a chance to use their knowledge and skills-in other words, to "do" the subject. Comment: I agree with this quote but think that is a bit simplistically described by the author. I do believe that students do need to master the skills and perhaps drills can be used to support this, but I think that skills can be mastered and knowledge can be obtained by actually “doing” the subject. At my school we use a method called Harkness to teach students. By using this method students sit around an oval table and discuss problems or parts of the curriculum. By doing this they are very much doing the subject, mastering the basics and doing the skills through drills that make it necessary for them to actually master what they are learning. Harkness discussions also allow students to develop other skills such as speaking amongst peers, listening, and considering the ideas of others. I think this is but another vital part of their learning and is a great example of "doing" the subject.
Quote: as a means of creating more authentic "performances of understanding," we recommend that teachers frame assessment tasks with the features suggested by the acronym GRASPS.
Comment: I found this portion of the chapter on the GRASPS frame to be very interesting indeed. In particular I like the idea of making the assessment task a real-world goal. I think that this is vital for teaching my subject of modern world history. Whenever I attempt to connect what we are studying to something that is happening in the news, students seem much more willing to want to listen and I find that they are much more absorbed in the lesson. I never really thought to include this sort of real-world method of instruction in assessments for my 10th grade students.
Questions: What is a meaningful role for a student? Is this not something different for some students? If this is the case is there a way of making some meaningful role that will accommodate all students? (These questions relate to the second part of GRASPS).
Unboxed article
I initially was given exposure to a RAFT the HTH 240 that I am currently going through at High-Tech High GSE. I immediately thought that it could be something that I could implement in my own classroom. I really like the idea that the RAFT allows students choice in how they are going to complete the assignment. This lends itself perfectly to the idea that students are given choice and an option in the work that they are doing at school, they are more inclined to actually “buy into” the assignment itself and as a result they would produce a better end product. Although the example in the High-tech High class that first exposed me to the RAFT was designed for middle school students, I decided that I would attempt to implement a RAFT in my 11th/12th grade Post-Colonial Africa class. The class itself is comprised of 17 students all with varying degrees of writing aptitude. I used the examples given to me and set about designing my own RAFT with a focus on game management and poaching in sub-Saharan Africa as this was the unit that we were studying at the time. I was able to easily fill the role section of the raft by introducing individuals who are involved in animal management, such as a poacher, or a game warden, a sub Saharan African politician, and a rhino horn dealer in Asia. I attempted to make the assignment a mixture between final products that students we used to, and more creative, contemporary options for those students who might be more creative. I provided the option of an essay or an economic report for those students who felt comfortable completing the assignment using a format that they were familiar with, but also gave students the option to complete the assignment using a satellite telephone conversation, a wikileaks document or a video for those that had more creativity. The topic portion was fairly easy to construct as I knew exactly what I want students to know. The topics were created in conjunction with the roles themselves. The section of the RAFT’s creation that I had the most difficulty with was creating the audience portion. I thought about it for a few days and kept changing my intended audience options, but after finally speaking to a colleague, she suggested that I simply make the audience exactly the same as the role portion. This worked out beautifully and my RAFT was finally ready to be presented to the students.
On the afternoon that I had set aside to explain the RAFT and introduce it to students, I prepared carefully to ensure that they knew that I was presenting the assignment to them in such a way so as to give them choice. The lesson itself began with me handing out the sheet which described the RAFT and I went into an elaborate explanation of why a raft would give students the option to create something that they had choice in how the final product turned out. Almost immediately a student raised a hand and asked me to explain what choices they should make from each column. WAFT. This stopped my explanation of the rationale for the RAFT itself and I quickly went into explaining that students needed to choose one option from each of the vertical columns. I was able at the end of having explained the mechanics of the RAFT to the class the rationale for the raft itself but realize that this should have been completed at the beginning of the lesson. The students seemed to really like the idea of choice and at least 35 minutes was spent discussing each of the choices and how they could fit into choices in another column. I actually asked each student after having looked at the options quietly for 10 minutes to make their choices and then explain the rationale of their choice to the class. By doing this even those students who didn't necessarily understand how the RAFT worked initially, were able to grasp the concept.
I videotaped the class and upon watching the recording I realized that my presentation of the raft was far from perfect. When I was interrupted in my explanation of the rationale for the RAFT by the first students I should not have assumed that everybody in the class simply understood why we were doing the raft. I should have said that the question would have been answered once I explained that the RAFT allows students choice and by giving students choice I was attending to the different learning styles of students in the classroom. The video of the lesson also showed me that some of this the students who questioned the different topics on the RAFT did not have their questions answered fully by the teacher which probably left them frustrated by the entire process. I also needed to slow down my delivery so as to allow students the opportunity to ask more questions. Students were unusually quiet during this lesson which was unfortunate because I really wanted student participation during this lesson. It was only after having finished the lesson that I asked students why they were quiet during the lesson and they explained to me that it was because they were being videotaped.
A day after the lesson I asked a colleague of mine to watch the lesson and give me feedback on how I presented the RAFT. She basically affirmed what I had seen of myself during the process but also said that I should have allowed even longer than the 30 minutes that I allocated to allow students to work out and discuss the different options available to them in the RAFT. She suggested that by doing this I would be allowing those students who didn't understand the intricate part of combining the four options carefully the opportunity to develop their thoughts and ideas by listening to their peers. This conversation with my peer also allowed me some valuable insight into the pacing of my delivery not just for the raft, or other future lessons.
Students are still involved in the writing of their RAFTS so it is difficult at this stage to know if the options afforded to them are actually going to result in an improvement over other similar writing assignments. It should be noted however that when students have worked on the assignment in class they seem far more interested in the topic and it must be considered that this is because they have been given some freedom in determining the process and outcome of the assignment.
Quote: as a means of creating more authentic "performances of understanding," we recommend that teachers frame assessment tasks with the features suggested by the acronym GRASPS.
Comment: I found this portion of the chapter on the GRASPS frame to be very interesting indeed. In particular I like the idea of making the assessment task a real-world goal. I think that this is vital for teaching my subject of modern world history. Whenever I attempt to connect what we are studying to something that is happening in the news, students seem much more willing to want to listen and I find that they are much more absorbed in the lesson. I never really thought to include this sort of real-world method of instruction in assessments for my 10th grade students.
Questions: What is a meaningful role for a student? Is this not something different for some students? If this is the case is there a way of making some meaningful role that will accommodate all students? (These questions relate to the second part of GRASPS).
Unboxed article
I initially was given exposure to a RAFT the HTH 240 that I am currently going through at High-Tech High GSE. I immediately thought that it could be something that I could implement in my own classroom. I really like the idea that the RAFT allows students choice in how they are going to complete the assignment. This lends itself perfectly to the idea that students are given choice and an option in the work that they are doing at school, they are more inclined to actually “buy into” the assignment itself and as a result they would produce a better end product. Although the example in the High-tech High class that first exposed me to the RAFT was designed for middle school students, I decided that I would attempt to implement a RAFT in my 11th/12th grade Post-Colonial Africa class. The class itself is comprised of 17 students all with varying degrees of writing aptitude. I used the examples given to me and set about designing my own RAFT with a focus on game management and poaching in sub-Saharan Africa as this was the unit that we were studying at the time. I was able to easily fill the role section of the raft by introducing individuals who are involved in animal management, such as a poacher, or a game warden, a sub Saharan African politician, and a rhino horn dealer in Asia. I attempted to make the assignment a mixture between final products that students we used to, and more creative, contemporary options for those students who might be more creative. I provided the option of an essay or an economic report for those students who felt comfortable completing the assignment using a format that they were familiar with, but also gave students the option to complete the assignment using a satellite telephone conversation, a wikileaks document or a video for those that had more creativity. The topic portion was fairly easy to construct as I knew exactly what I want students to know. The topics were created in conjunction with the roles themselves. The section of the RAFT’s creation that I had the most difficulty with was creating the audience portion. I thought about it for a few days and kept changing my intended audience options, but after finally speaking to a colleague, she suggested that I simply make the audience exactly the same as the role portion. This worked out beautifully and my RAFT was finally ready to be presented to the students.
On the afternoon that I had set aside to explain the RAFT and introduce it to students, I prepared carefully to ensure that they knew that I was presenting the assignment to them in such a way so as to give them choice. The lesson itself began with me handing out the sheet which described the RAFT and I went into an elaborate explanation of why a raft would give students the option to create something that they had choice in how the final product turned out. Almost immediately a student raised a hand and asked me to explain what choices they should make from each column. WAFT. This stopped my explanation of the rationale for the RAFT itself and I quickly went into explaining that students needed to choose one option from each of the vertical columns. I was able at the end of having explained the mechanics of the RAFT to the class the rationale for the raft itself but realize that this should have been completed at the beginning of the lesson. The students seemed to really like the idea of choice and at least 35 minutes was spent discussing each of the choices and how they could fit into choices in another column. I actually asked each student after having looked at the options quietly for 10 minutes to make their choices and then explain the rationale of their choice to the class. By doing this even those students who didn't necessarily understand how the RAFT worked initially, were able to grasp the concept.
I videotaped the class and upon watching the recording I realized that my presentation of the raft was far from perfect. When I was interrupted in my explanation of the rationale for the RAFT by the first students I should not have assumed that everybody in the class simply understood why we were doing the raft. I should have said that the question would have been answered once I explained that the RAFT allows students choice and by giving students choice I was attending to the different learning styles of students in the classroom. The video of the lesson also showed me that some of this the students who questioned the different topics on the RAFT did not have their questions answered fully by the teacher which probably left them frustrated by the entire process. I also needed to slow down my delivery so as to allow students the opportunity to ask more questions. Students were unusually quiet during this lesson which was unfortunate because I really wanted student participation during this lesson. It was only after having finished the lesson that I asked students why they were quiet during the lesson and they explained to me that it was because they were being videotaped.
A day after the lesson I asked a colleague of mine to watch the lesson and give me feedback on how I presented the RAFT. She basically affirmed what I had seen of myself during the process but also said that I should have allowed even longer than the 30 minutes that I allocated to allow students to work out and discuss the different options available to them in the RAFT. She suggested that by doing this I would be allowing those students who didn't understand the intricate part of combining the four options carefully the opportunity to develop their thoughts and ideas by listening to their peers. This conversation with my peer also allowed me some valuable insight into the pacing of my delivery not just for the raft, or other future lessons.
Students are still involved in the writing of their RAFTS so it is difficult at this stage to know if the options afforded to them are actually going to result in an improvement over other similar writing assignments. It should be noted however that when students have worked on the assignment in class they seem far more interested in the topic and it must be considered that this is because they have been given some freedom in determining the process and outcome of the assignment.