Inclusive Teaching and Learning The approach The approach is based on the assumption that no complete inclusion occurs unless students are totally involved in the process of teaching and learning. In other words, any inclusion that excludes
"Inclusive Teaching and Learning The approach The" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to
download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it
on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright
notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this
agreement.
Presentation Transcript
01
Inclusive Teaching and Learning<br>
02
The approach The approach is based on the assumption that no complete inclusion occurs unless students are totally involved in the process of teaching and learning. In other words, any inclusion that excludes teaching and learning is nothing more than bare social inclusion.
The implementation of the approach requires many other ideas and support we can get from various researchers.
We borrow the general pattern of teaching and suggestions from Wiggins and McTighe Understanding by Design, namely:<br>
03
1. Plan the Unit after having established the authentic performance you want your student to achieve. In order to do this:
decide what knowledge, skills, attitudes, and deep understanding you want the student to achieve
remember the skills should be the same across the subject content to attain the continuous practice of competence
remember the Deep understanding is the answer to an Essential Question.
[According to Carol Tomlinson, ‘deep understanding’ is what every student should achieve, as explained in: Wiggins and McTighe (2013), Essential questioning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD].<br>
04
Authentic performance The ‘authentic performance’, as a student’s learning achievement, should be experienced hands-on by the teacher first, who needs to plan all the requirements in terms of:
knowledge
skills
attitudes
challenges of the task.<br>
05
2. The diagnostic assessment is meant to assess the readiness of the student in terms of:
Prior knowledge
Experience connected to the topic or the subject matter
Vocabulary of the student
Interest in learning
Student profile: cognitive and learning styles<br>
06
3a. The instruction is implemented through many ‘learning experiences’. For this to occur keep in mind the following components and principles:
Introducing the general objective of the Unit and the specific objective of the day
Keeping students active (engaging them in their own learning: working alone, in random pairs, in cooperative learning activities etc.)
Involving students in various ways
Practicing: hands-on experiences
Presenting worked-out examples<br>
07
3b. Scaffolding
Questioning
Semantic mapping
Summarising
Proceeding in small steps
Paying attention to the skills and attitudes involved in the activities
Every learning experience must be assessed through Formative Assessment<br>
08
4. Assessment after instruction
A time at the end of the instruction devoted to the recall and control of the Unit content, before moving to authentic performance.
The teacher controls the student preparation for the task through:
Integration of knowledge
Mastered skills
Discussion about the deep understanding for successful transfer<br>
09
5. The same task is assigned to all students.
Scaffolding: students with difficulties can get a variety of supports that allow them to accomplish the task.
All students get the analytic-generic rubric on the competence and must hand the task and the self-evaluation grid to the teacher.<br>
10
6. Learning after summative assessment
Students get the exemplary task prepared by the teacher and confront their own performance with the exemplary one.
They then reflect on their own strengths and weaknesses and answer the following question:
‘What do I have to do to accomplish a better task?’<br>
11
References G. Wiggins & McTighe (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
G. Wiggins & McTighe (2013). Essential questioning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
C. Tomlinson (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction & Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA ASCD.
C. Tomlinson & M.B. Imbeau (2010 ). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
C. Tomlinson (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
C. Tomlinson & M.B. Imbeau (2013). Differentiated instruction. An integration and practice. In B.J. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.). The handbook of educational theories. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
D. Wiliam, & S. Leahy (2015). Embedding formative assessment. West Palm Beach, FL: LearningScienceInternational.
P.J. Black, & D. Wiliam (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability. 21(19), 5-31.
P.J. Black, & D. Wiliam (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability. 21(19), 5-31.
B. Rosenshine, & C. Meister (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 26-33.
B. Rosenshine, “Principles of instruction. Research-based strategies that all teachers should know”, in American Educator, 36/1 (2012), pp. 12-19 e 39.<br>