Hand in Hand: Individualization and Of, For, As Assessment

An important conceptualization that prospective teachers learn is the intertwine amongst curriculum, instruction and assessment:

                                                            Classroom:

                           Instruction  <--------------------------------> Assessment 

                                                           

                                   ^                                                                 ^  

                                   |--------------> Curriculum <-------------|

Teachers are responsible for teaching the curriculum and do so through varying instructional strategies. Teachers assess the effectiveness of their instructional strategies through assessments. Upon consulting these assessments teachers adjust their instructional strategies to their students in order to effectively relay the curriculum they are prescribed to teach. 

Through my personal experiences I have seen this model in work, more interestingly, I have seen how this model fits hand-in-hand with individualization. Throughout my university career I have tutored Mathematics and I have found it invaluable to constantly assess AoL and AfL in order to see if the activities I am doing are effective, and when they are proven not to be effective I change my instructional approach and then re-assess to ensure that the curriculum is being effectively learnt. I started off my tutoring approach with direct instruction , simultaneously giving examples and explanations of the Mathematical processes which ended with independent practice. Upon assessing the student's responses to several questions (AoL) I discovered that my instructional method was not effective. I then changed my instructional approach to hands on, manipulative based activities in which the student was a more active part of the learning process (such as grouping candies to model division) which made use of kinestetic-visual learning rather than verbal-visual learning. Upon another AoL, I found that the student understood the Mathematical processes we were going over much better. I then implemented a brief AfL, asking the student which method of instruction they preferred (which measured which method they were most engaged with), which one they found easiest to use to understand the concept and if there was anything that I could do to clarify things or make the learning process easier. This allowed me to tailor my instructional approach to my student--a process known as individualization--in order to ensure that the student was not only in the best position to learn, but was in a position in which they were most motivated to learn. This process of individualization was increasingly important for me as a mentor because I was dealing with a student with an exceptionality; therefore, I wanted to ensure that my instruction was tailored to their specific learning needs, learning needs that were not being met in the traditional classroom which doesn't have the resources to have the instructional flexibility that I have access to being one-on-one with the student. It is also important to note that through this process of individualization and AfL, teachers endorse AaL as well, as students become better able to identity what learning strategies work best for them. The student I tutor recognized that they preferred play-based exercises and would ask to engage in those activities--they were able to recognize which instructional strategies best facilitate their learning and engagement.

So, the diagram then transforms into:

                               Individual learner: 

     Instruction  <--------------------------------> Assessment 

                 
                 ^                                                          ^
                 |                                                            |
                 |------->                               <---------|                      
                                          Student 
                  ^                                                             ^ 
                  |                                                               |

                  |                                                               |  

                  |--------------> Curriculum <-----------|

The curriculum is instructed to the student who is then assessed to see how affective the teacher's instructional strategies are relaying the curriculum. Through this assessment the teacher is able to adapt their instructional methods to optimize the student's learning (individualization). In turn, the student becomes more aware of themselves as an individual learner as their A(f)L evokes a metacognitive process [A(a)L].

I have discussed the importance of individualization as it interweaves of, for and as assessment and specifically helps those with exceptionalities, but how can teachers in a traditional classroom practice individualization? It requires that teachers tailor their lessons to the individual learner, in which one class comprises of twenty students. This approach is demanding of the teacher, which calls for the ministry to downsize the number of students per class. Though this paradigm switch is costly, one must consider that educational literature recognizes that students possess a diversity of learning styles and multiple intelligences, which calls for an individualistic approach to classroom delivery. The world, too, is becoming more and more individualized, people now have life plans that differ from the collective of their family and societal expectations, and more and more people are forming entrepreneurial enterprises which focus on personal attributes, skills and capabilities. When the world and working paradigm are becoming individualized, why wouldn't the classroom become so too? Are teachers not facilitating the transition from school to society? Perhaps a solution could be a play on the flipped classroom, in which the teacher would create diverse instructional aids (tailored lessons with examples, tailored computer programs) that students consult individually at home and when at school the teacher will circulate the classroom, ensuring that each child receives individual help in conjunction with their individualized lesson. 

Here, Insight schools describe how they individualize education in conjunction with assessment, instruction and curriculum: 

Insight schools. Individualized Education at Insight Schools. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAHF7ly6cuw&list=UUn5BbP_SXfz2eXABkp2B7hg. 

My Experience with Experiential Learning

I want to start my blog by sharing an experience that rings true to the effectiveness of new-story education, an experience that showed me first-hand the merit of active, experiential learning. As a student of French education ensuring language competency is paramount, especially being an Anglophone French education student. I wanted to exhaust another avenue to improve my communication skills and fluency, so when my University offered a Summer exchange I immediately signed-up. I stayed in Trois- Pistoles, Quebec for a month living with a host-family. My days followed a schedule in which I would attend a language class (which taught and reinforced fundamentals of the language), followed by an atelier where you chose an extracurricular activity to complete (I chose the reading and writing of French literature and French film), then every night there was a cultural activity to take part in (my favourite was the concert of Patrice Michaud, a known Quebecois musician). My experience in Quebec affected the ways I understood and appreciated the language in ways I could've never imagined, which is why I have solidified myself as an advocate for interactive education.

I believe that one of the many reasons my French was able to improve so much in such a short amount of time was the two-pronged immersion under which I lived. Not only was I immersed in the language when having to communicate with citizens of the town (most of which spoke no word of English) but I was also immersed in the language when living at home, having to communicate with my colocs (roommates) and famille d'accueil (host family) in French as well. When communicating with native speakers I received corrections that facilitated the improvement of my vocabulary and my comprehensiveness, simply living under conditions such as these refined my French and helped me ameliorate common Anglophonic mistakes that I often made. I believe that this method of language apprehension is much more affective than the passive, old-story method of learning French grammar and composition. Yes, it is necessary to learn subject-verb agreement, know how to conjugate verbs and know which modifiers go where, but composition and communication isn't something that can simply be memorized. You have to experience communicating in real-time with native speakers to prove testament to your semantics and be able to communicate within the perimeters of a conversation, forcing yourself to be reactive. Being able to write a sentence semantically and grammatically correct within the classroom is entirely different than being able to ask for directions to a native speaker or correct yourself and circumvent in order to explain something to someone who doesn't understand the context under which you speak. It is for this reason that I do not believe that a langauge is simply learned, but experienced and lived within--something that passive education simply does not facilitate, but interactive education does. William Temple said that "the most influential of all educational factors is the conversation in a child's home." After having lived in an immersive Francophone environment, I prove testament to Temple's observation. You learn the most under those and from those you most closely interact with. Having lived with a Francophone family taught me the most of all--vocabulary I never learnt in school, expressing cultural sensitivity and understanding and being able to communicate with the purpose of being understood. That is to say, living under, and experencing, a Francophonic enviornment is the most conducive way to learn French if the most learning occurs within the context under which you live.

Not only was I immersed in a language, but I was immersed in a culture. It is one thing to listen to a lecture about a culture's history and identity, look at photos in a textbook; it is another thing entirely to live in, and experience, the culture first hand--to have a hand of being part of a culture's history. I believe that it is through cultural interaction that a culture's identity is best understood and appreciated. When on exchange I was told Quebecois legends from natives of the area, ate meals that Quebecois families have been cooking for generations (my favourite of which was Vol-au-vent, a puff pastry filled with chicken that has been stewed with gravy and legumes), listened to traditional Quebecois music and learnt traditional Quebecois dance. These are experiences that not only enriched my understanding of French culture but are experiences that I can bring into the classroom. Instead of having students merely read a chapter on Quebecois culture, I can bring in the cooked meals that I ate, play the music I listened to, in order to evoke a first-hand cultural interaction within the classroom. Better yet, I can bring students to Quebec for a direct first-hand experience of the culture.

Throughout this post I have stressed the importance of active, first-hand experiential learning, as my exchange improved my understanding of  French language and culture in the span of one month when I have been studying French and trying to improve my compentancy for years. I believe that it is through interactive education that students will be better able to learn and understand language. They not only learn to comprehend the language through their repeated exposure, but they force themselves to learn the nuances of the language and discover vocabulary that is learned solely from speaking to a native speaker. Not to mention, as a result of interactive education, students can become more motivated to learn and observe the applicability  of speaking another language, both of which encourage and foster engaged students and continuance, I believe, of secondary language education. It is for these reasons why I am an advocate for mandatory immersive programs within secondary language education, even if it is taking students to Quebec for a week. Living in Quebec for a month reminded me why I have devoted my educational career to the French language and improved my communication and comprehension skills in ways that the classroom, with its passive approach to education, has been unable to do. Even though a month-long immersion may not fit into the curriculum, even a small amount of time can make a large educational difference.