3 solomon - national forum journals - dr. kritsonis

8/14/2019 3 Solomon - NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS - DR. KRITSONIS

1/31

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1, 2008-2009

TEACHER LEARNING FOR EQUITABLE

INSTRUCTION OF ELL AND SPED

LEARNERS IN THE MAINSTREAM

CLASSROOMS

Margaret Solomon

University of Redlands

ABSTRACT

The article makes the case for teacher practitioners in the mainstream classrooms to

take on the instructional challenges they face with ELL and Special Needs learners with

a renewed perspective of becoming learners themselves. First it describes what is teacher

learning and then shows why teacher learning is vital. The author provides a learningframework and explains each component thoroughly showing how teacher reflection can

become the ultimate learning process.

normous pressure has been placed on teachers in themainstream classrooms to teach to all the learners for academic

success. The Educational reforms have impacted learning in

the mainstream classrooms even to the extent of pushing the English

Language Learners (ELL) and Special needs learners (SPED). TheELL and SPED learners came to the mainstream classroom through

various educational reforms efforts contributing many teaching and

learning challenges for teachers and students. Teachers are expected toteach for grade level mastery of all students in all subjects regardless

of their lack of academic skills and knowledge. This raises questions

such as, What should teachers do? Should they in distraught pass ontheir failing students to fate within the educational system? Or

should they take upon this challenge with a renewed perspective?

E

In order for teachers to manage the described instructionalchallenges with an encompassing perspective and provide academic

success for all learners they have to become learners themselves.

Instead of feeling comfortable with the idea that they have mastered

39


2/31

40 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

learning how to teach, they must set themselves as continuous learners

of their own practice. That type of purposeful learning would help

teachers gain the needed knowledge, skills and proficiency to teach alllearners. Unless teachers take definite steps to learn and gain

knowledge and professional skills to bring change in their pedagogytheir efforts will not benefit students.

This article first describes and explains what is teacher learning

and then shows why teacher learning is vital in the context of teaching

ELL and SPED learners in the mainstream classroom. In additionteacher reflection is described as the meaningful process for learning

new knowledge and instructional skills to match the learning needs of

ELL and SPED learners. All these ideas will be conceptualized withinthe framework of teacher learning which takes the center stage in the

discussion.

What is Teacher Learning?

Basically, the term teacher learning refers to teachers gaining

new knowledge about teaching and learning. In the context of makinginstructional adaptations for special learners we conceptualize teacher

learning as a type of learning that would help them become responsive

to teaching and make teaching responsive to student learning. Withinthis concept we picture teachers as learners who are continuously

learning about their teaching and knowing how it matches with student

learning. Teacher learning implies revising beliefs and values,

acquiring new knowledge and skill, adapting to new patterns of work(Sykes, l999. p. 153). Teacher learning also can be seen as a type of

situated cognition (Brown et al., 1989) when teachers are able to

think and reflect about their teaching and discover its effect on studentlearning. It is also learning what they know, what they have to know,

and how to know in particular contexts. Therefore, teacher learning

has to do with the nature of teachers knowledge and the newknowledge they have to acquire to bring pedagogical changes to meet

student needs.


3/31

Margaret Solomon 41

Here teacher learning is envisioned as a professional

development process to build knowledge and understanding for

meeting the instructional demands teachers face in teaching Englishlearners and special needs students in the mainstream classrooms.

Emphasizing learning for teachers does not conflict with the learningtraditions of schools. In as much as schools are regarded as learning

organizations and they are run with an orientation to learning foreveryone (Senge, 2000); therefore, the learning for teachers

recommended here is natural and relevant.

Rationale for Teacher Learning

Although learning is imperative for teachers to achieve the

pedagogical applications of educational policies imposed on schools,

reforms do not make teacher learning a priority. Further, educationalreforms are centered on bringing equity in learning and equal access tothe curriculum for all learners but the policies usually do not consider

what learning teachers have to undertake to make that policy goal a

reality in their classrooms. Further policies seldom consider time andefforts for teachers to build their capacity for implementing reform

goals. For example, at present schools are fully absorbed in

implementing the requirements of NCLB which has the broad goal ofraising the achievement levels of all students especially

underperforming groups, and to close the achievement gap (Darling-

Hammond, 2004). This accountability driven reform holds teachers to

implement grade level content standards and teach all the learners toachieve the performance measures set by the Adequate Yearly Progress

indicators and Academic Performance Index in California. While

prescribing these measures for teachers, NCLB has not madeallowance for teachers to learn and acquire the necessary skills to meet

those measures.

The history of American education is filled with reforms of this

kind, including school desegregation, mainstreaming special needs

students into regular classroomsThe logic of such reform does not


4/31


centrally implicate teacher learning, but the reform cannot succeed

unless teachers change some of their beliefs, practicesmany other

curricular or organizational reforms typically places a heavy burdenof learning on teachers, where learning is associated with change of

some kind(Sykes, 1999, p. 153).

Although educational reforms attempt to direct change inteaching, they do not take into consideration the importance of teacher

learning which alone would lead to change in their teaching practice to

accommodate the educational needs of diverse learners in theirclassrooms while meeting the demands of the law (Cohen & Barnes,

1993). According to the American Federation of Teachers report

(1995)without professional development school reform will nothappenThe nation can adopt rigorous standards, set forth a visionary

scenario, compile the best research about how students learn

promote teaching strategies that have been successful with a widerange of students,But, unless the classroom teacher understands andis committed to the plan and knows how to make it happen, the dream

will come to naught (pp. 1-2)

As you can gather from these quoted statements, teacher

learning is considered an essential component for mainstream teachers

who are expected to teach ELL and other at risk learners for academicsuccess. It is reiterated further in the following words, If teachers are

to prepare an ever more diverse group of students for much more

challenging workthey will need substantially more knowledge and

radically different skills than most now have and most schools ofeducation now develop (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 1997, p.

178).

National and State level Achievement Data reports indicate that

currently many of the ELL and SPED learners do not experience

academic success in the mainstream classrooms. California schooldata shows that ELL are 83 points below their other counterparts on

their Academic Performance Index (API) score and Special needs

learners are 190 below the API score of other learners.(California


5/31

Margaret Solomon 43

Department of Education, 2007-08 Accountability Progress

Reporting). There is also wide discrepancy in the academic

achievements of ELL and SPED learners in comparison with gradelevel regular students at the national level (NAPE, 2005), this

continues to plague the educational system. These learners willcontinue to slip through our fingers and drop out of school unless

teachers have the pedagogical expertise to adopt learning to the uniquedifferences of these students. This means that mainstream teachers

have to teach students with varying academic abilities including the

ELL and SPED learners and must take up some new learning in orderto make instructional adaptations to meet their needs. That makes

teacher learning a prerequisite to applying new pedagogy.

In a study on how a selected group of 3rd grade teachers used a

new math text that required them to change their content and methods

of teaching, it was seen that teachers revisited their current knowledgeabout teaching math first and then expanded their mathematical andpedagogical understanding through a learning process (Remillard,

2000). The underlying principle here is that through learning that

focuses on pedagogical knowledge and skills teachers can experiencea renewal to their teaching persona as well as make a difference for

their students.

Similarly, in making instructional adaptations for ELL and

SPED learners teachers have to first examine their current knowledge

and understanding about these special learners and the pedagogy most

appropriate to them and acquire new knowledge and skills they needfor engaging these learners in the learning process of the classroom.

The following diagram truly represents the conceptualization of

teacher learning because the context, content and process are essentialelements in the learning experiences of teachers.

Components of Teacher Learning


6/31


Learning about the Context

The reality of the mainstream classroom centers on the

students who are interacting with the learning environment providedby the teachers. Teacher learning begins with teachers understanding

their current teaching context and then learning what instructional

decisions to make to create the most favorable context for theirlearners. In every classroom the teacher takes the lead in creating the

learning environment that either engages the learners or ignores it. The

learning environment has a powerful influence on studentsmotivation; therefore creating a positive learning environment that is

learner centered is essential in providing curriculum access for ELL

and SPED learners.

In order to create the learning context that supports the access

of grade level academic content and skills for our special learners,

teachers must develop the type of instruction that takes the priorknowledge of these learners into consideration and builds on the skills

and knowledge they have. A learner engages in the reading and writing

Context

Content

Process


7/31

Margaret Solomon 45

and becomes motivated if there is interaction with teachers and peers,

and participation in the meaning-negotiation processif prior beliefs

and knowledge are activated, if tasks are personally relevant, and ifactive meaning construction is involved. The teacher who incorporates

these features in the learning environment is considered to be masterygoal oriented and is much more likely to produce productive learning

in students (Ruddell & Unrau, 1994, p.1498) Teachers canorchestrate this type of learning environment for their students, one

that engages their students by validating their culture, prior knowledge

and language skills.

Teacher Learning Content

Teacher learning is not only a concept, it is also a practical idea

that entails specific content and process for the selected context ofteaching ELL and SPED learners in mainstream classrooms. Thecontent of teacher learning refers to what teachers must learn now and

continue to learn to facilitate an effective learning environment for all

learners. Moreover it also includes the affective and cognitive domainsthat teachers draw from when they incorporate knowledge, skills and

process while working with students. The learning recommended here

consists of three content focus areas: 1. the content for developing newbeliefs, knowledge, skills and experiences for teachers to build their

instructional capacity to meet the unique learning needs of their

special learners. Since there is a direct connection between teacher

beliefs and practice it is essential to bring change in beliefs and thatcan be successfully accomplished only through teachers learning for

that purpose. 2. New knowledge about ELL and SPED learners. 3.

Instructional adaptations of the academic content for making learningconnections for students with varying needs.

Personal prior knowledge and beliefs


8/31


Learning begins for teachers with the reflection of how their

personal knowledge and beliefs contribute to the instructional stancethey take regarding their students learning. Instructional stance refers

to instructional decisions teachers make in the teaching and learningprocess that are influenced by the prior knowledge and beliefs teachers

hold. (Ruddell & Unrau, 2004) Green (1971) describes teaching asbeing concerned with the formation of beliefs, both what we believe

and how we believe it. He states, teaching has to do, in part at least,

with the formation of beliefs, and that means that it has to do notsimply with what we shall believe, but with how we believe it.

Teaching is an activity which has to do, among other things, with the

modification and formation of belief systems (p. 48). Weiss also(1995) supports the view that teachers personal beliefs, interests and

knowledge about teaching and learning provides the inertia for their

instructional practice. According to her, a teacher interprets his/herteaching act with personal interests, ideologies and knowledge aboutstudents, content, teaching and learning. Therefore, learning about the

personal knowledge and beliefs they hold about the special learners in

the classroom is an essential component of the learning content.

Pedagogical Knowledge

The pedagogical knowledge piece is a crucial part of the

teacher learning content, in as much as the teachers belief system and

their prior knowledge have a great deal of influence on how theyteach. In addition, principles of good teaching practice need to play a

central part in teacher learning. The literature in this specific area

speaks about two perspectives teachers have to learn in terms of pedagogy, namely, the adaptive perspective and the critical

perspective. Here we would like to take relevant concepts from both

the perspectives. The adaptive perspective (Devency and Sykes, l988;Kennedy, l991) refers to the content on adapting to the change of the

social and demographic characteristics of the learners and the nature of

their learning. When teachers apply instructional strategies to the


9/31

Margaret Solomon 47

identified learning difficulties students face they are using adaptive

perspective.

On the other hand critical perspective arises from the social

conflicts between the dominant gender, race and class over education.This perspective argues that the prevailing teaching practices serve for

an unequal structured society with unequal results of schooling andcalls for changes in teaching and teachers. Thus, instead of asking

teachers to learn to adapt their pedagogy to perpetuate the current

system, this perspective suggests that the central tasks of teacherlearning is helping students to learn to participate in changing the

unequal structured society and defining their own future. (Frankstein,

l983; Freire, l970; Noddings, l990). Thus, critical perspective givesteachers a philosophical norm to overcome historical problems of

alienation, social struggles and educational marginalization ELL and

special needs learners have historically experienced.

Therefore, teaching ELL and SPED learners the grade level

academic content requires teachers to have a new set of skills from

both adaptive and critical perspectives of pedagogy in order to buildtheir instructional repertoire. That really asserts mainstream teachers

must learn to adapt their teaching to the learning needs of their

students and also develop a sense of responsibility to bring equity inthe learning contexts envisioning new possibilities. Consequently,

empowering students to become successful learners and active

participants in developing an equitable society becomes a natural

result.

Knowledge about the ELL and SPED Learners

In order to become proficient in their orientation to teaching

these two focused student populations, mainstream teachers need tolearn about the nature of the students specialties and understand who

they really are. In studies that explored teachers orientations toward

diverse learners, they noted that the knowledge of teachers about their


10/31


diverse students was often superficial. Paine (1988) stated, Teachers

ability to talk about student differences in thoughtful, comprehensive

ways was often limited; and their thinking about its pedagogicalimplications was often quite problematic. For example, these

prospective teachers seemed to share the sense that student differencesshould be taken into account, but they were often unsure about how to

think about those differences in terms of planning and arrangingacademic work. Their discussions of diversity were often

contradictory (p. 291).

Although most teachers agree that student differences should

be taken into account in the teaching process, they seemed to lack

understanding of the learning needs of students with differences.Therefore, it is important to emphasize the need for mainstream

teachers to gain a thorough knowledge about the ELL and other

students with special needs in order to be able to make instructionaladaptations for them.

Learning about their Educational Needs

Mainstream teachers familiarity and understanding of

principles involved in learning a second language is essential foreffective instructional delivery. Cummins (l981) ideas on the domains

of second language development are helpful reminders that in learning

English, the ELL first acquires Basic Interpersonal Communication

Skills (BICS) which is learned through social interactions with their peer and achieved easily. Then, the Cognitive Academic Language

Proficiency (CALP) is achieved through various cognitive

engagements in the classroom. According to research it is estimatedthat it takes five to seven years for ELL to achieve CALP (Cummins,

1981).

In many situations, it is common for ELLs to be placed in

mainstream classrooms without the grade level academic language

proficiency because their BICS have reflected verbal fluency in


11/31

Margaret Solomon 49

English considered ready for grade level content learning. Often, when

teachers or counselors hear them speak English fluently, they are

mistakenly considered English proficient even when ELLs have notfully mastered the language. Although in most of the schools that have

a high number of ELLs some types of assessment are given to find outtheir English language proficiency before they are placed in a grade at

the elementary level and in a course at the secondary level, thisassessment data may not give any information about the academic

language proficiency level of the ELL. In order to be successful in

mainstream classrooms where academic language is used constantly by teachers who teach content materials, students need academic

language support to understand and acquire content knowledge.

Academic success and student empowerment are associated with ELLgaining academic language proficiency. This is a vital information

mainstream teachers must understand.

Cummins (2001) suggests that in order to increase ELLsacademic language proficiency teachers have to focus instruction

around these three areas: focus on language, focus on meaning, and

focus on language use. Focus on language refers to the forms and useof language, focus on meaning is about making input comprehensible

and developing critical literacy, and focus on use is about ways of

using language to generate new knowledge and confirm what theyknow. All these three areas of language involve engagement in

reading, writing, thinking and speaking. This is a helpful way of

looking at second language learning for mainstream teachers because

in the learning of subject matter content language is used in all threeways. This framework will not only assist teachers to understand the

learning functioning of their ELL it also would also assist

recognizing areas that need instructional attention. Then makeadaptations through these three areas of language development. Since

language acquisition takes place when students make new connections

with information they hear and see around them through reading andwriting (Kettler & Kettler, 2002) these avenues should be considered

seriously in mainstream teaching.


12/31


Further, developing language abilities requires instruction that

also integrates extensive reading of texts and expansion of vocabulary

knowledge contributing to the development of academic language proficiency. Teachers must know that effective instruction in the

second language focuses initially on meaning beyond literalcomprehension. This is done by allowing students to relate textual

and instructional meanings to their own experience and priorknowledge by activating their cognitive schemata and critically

analyzing the information in the text(Cummins, 2001).

Promoting academic and cognitive engagement through a set

of techniques and strategies for making content meaningful is not

enough. According to Cummins (2001) Much more crucial is therecognition that human relationships are fundamental to students

academic engagementthis is particularly so in the case of second

language learnersFor students to invest their sense of self, theiridentity, in acquiring their new language and participating actively intheir new culture they must experience positive and affirming

interactions with members of that culture. (p.68).

The next phase of the teacher learning relates to the needs of

ELL from the cultural domain of their functioning. In a study by

Poplin and Weeres (1992) which inquired the types of relationshipsthat were in existence in four multicultural urban California schools,

they found there was a pervasive sense of despair for students in

urban settings. The study implied that there was a lack of successful

learner identity, students face cultural isolation, and overall confusionabout who they are in the learning context of the classroom.

These realities cause alienation and many subtle andunintentional rejections. It has also been found that only in very few

classrooms does ELL have the opportunity to negotiate their personal

identity and develop an acceptable learner identity. With these findingsit is worthwhile to be reminded that When students developing sense

of self is affirmed and extended through their interactions with

teachers, they are more likely to apply themselves to academic effort


13/31

Margaret Solomon 51

and participate actively in instruction.(Cummins, l996, p. 2). From

this we see that there is a direct relationship between the learning

efficiency of learners and validation of their culture. If culturalelements are not supported students learning is negatively affected. In

the case of ELL those factors show a great demand.

Learning about SPED Learners and their Educational Needs

In the case of learning about the special education students,mainstream teachers must know about the special education placement

process and the special designations given to them and their specific

learning characteristics. The placement of a special needs learner intoa mainstream class is decided and monitored by the Individual

Education Planning committee that consists of the special education

director, teacher, counselor, social worker, the administrator and theparent. This school team determines why the regular classroom settingwould best meet the unique needs of the learner under consideration.

The Individual Educational Planning (IEP) Team follows theguidelines on the least restrictive education placement procedures. If

Inclusion in the regular classroom for one or two hours is the choice of

the IEP committee because the student shows skill attributes tofunction in the regular classrooms, they assign the students for that

specification. Because inclusion is individualized, it will look

different for every student. (Merrit, 2001, p. 1) and it is based on the

needs of each student. The intent is not to simply push a student intothe regular classroom but to find the best way to educate them without

restriction in the learning environment.

The Individual Education Planning team also decides how best

to deliver instruction for each student qualifying for special education

services. If the team decides that placing a student in the least-restrictive environment of a mainstream classroom for part of the day

is the best for the student, the student schedule is modified to

accommodate that. At the secondary level, the student is assigned to


14/31


one or two mainstream classes first and in the elementary level the

student is assigned to the resource room for part of the day. The (IEP)

determined by the teacher led team clearly specifies the academic andaffective needs of the students and makes suggestions for

improvement. Thus, it is the IEP that introduces the SPED learner tothe regular teacher and becomes the guide for planning instruction for

teachers.

The academic and social needs of SPED learners vary from

student to student and within various designations of disabilities. Theneeds of special education students in the mainstream are uniquely

different because there are ability differences within each type of

special needs students. In addition, their learning capacities are variedfrom other learners in the classroom. Exceptional children are

different from non-exceptional children in many characteristics. They

may be intellectually superior, they many not see or hear as well, theymay not have the mobility of the average child, they may not have thefacility or skill in language or speech of the average child, or they may

be deviant in interpersonal relationships (Kirk, & Callagher, l983, p.

45).

The learning needs of SPED learners are much different from

that of the English learners, while their social needs may be the samebecause they also experience negative identity from their peers and

teachers. The special label placed on them has many negative

consequences on their self-concept. Their learning needs in the

mainstream classroom vary widely because their learningcharacteristics are intrinsically associated with their disability. Many

teachers mistakenly think that ELL and Special education students

learning difficulties are the same.

Research shows that most children with special needs who are

mainstreamed do not require specialized reading instructionaltechniques because they have been taught the basic reading skills in

special education classes. A great number of special needs students in

the mainstream class have mild learning disabilities, mild behavioral


15/31

Margaret Solomon 53

and emotional disabilities, as well as students with physical and

sensory disabilities, and students identified as speech delayed.

(Leyser, 2002, p. 1) However, a number of them do not read orcomprehend at grade level and most lack memory skills to store

information. In addition, they may also have difficulties in processinginformation they read or hear causing many learning problems. Some

might even exhibit behavioral disorders that disrupt instruction.Mainstream teachers need to be looking out for behavioral and

learning disruptions and be prepared to take precautionary steps to

avoid those moments.

Learners with special needs include sensory, cognitive and

physical disabilities. For example, the mildly LD students may be ableto read the text but cannot process the content knowledge presented in

the text while the students with mild emotional disabilities could read

and understand but have a high level of frustration and inability tocontrol their emotions. They are also unable to process information presented in class and achieve mastery of the content and skills.

Similarly, students with physical and speech complicatedness would

present other obvious challenges for the teacher in terms of movement,space and oral expression.

On the other hand, the gifted learners in the mainstream showmore demanding needs for the teacher and they are placed in the

regular classrooms with the hope their needs are better met there than

in a segregated classroom. The teacher is expected to provide an

accelerated curriculum with more advanced experiences. It is certainlyan enormous task for mainstream teachers to plan instructional

adaptations to support different ways of learning for SPED learners.

Unless mainstream teachers take charge of the learning of thesedifferent learners in their classrooms nobody will. This burden

however should be shared by the school administrators by providing

support and learning opportunities for their teachers. They must alsomake the necessary organizational changes within the schools

traditional schedule to accommodate the learning of teachers for


16/31


meeting the educational needs of these special learners with unique

learning challenges.

Teacher Learning Process

The key factor in teacher learning process is the acceptance of

the need for change in the regular instructional paradigm allowing

instructional adaptations for ELL and SPED learners. Teacher learningresearch clearly indicates that it is very difficult to learn to teach

demanding academic content to diverse learners. There is no doubt

then that teachers have to rethink their assumptions about diversecultural and learning characteristics of students and enhance their

subject matter knowledge on diversity. In order to achieve those

learning goals we have to consider an effective process of professionallearning. Professional development literature presents threeperspectives about teacher learning process (Richardson & Hamilton,

1994). The first perspective represents the traditional externally driven

professional development process in which consultants and specialistsare hired to teach some new information to teachers. It may be new

curriculum adaptation or preparing for the State assessment or for

purposes that relate to what teachers have to do to manage theirclassrooms.

The next perspective supports the idea of the teacher becoming

the self-directed learner developing personal knowledge and skills tomeet the demands of the classroom through reflection. As an

independent artisan (Hubberman, l993) the individual teacher serves

as arbiter of new ideas, adopting or adapting some, rejecting othersLearning is largely self-selected and self-directed (Sykes, l999, p.

157) Here the teacher freely chooses what is best for him/her and may

even modify and change practice to transform student learning. In thethird perspective, teachers are viewed as social beings constantly

interacting with their environment; therefore, learning is structured


17/31

Margaret Solomon 55

within the cultural and organizational context of the school with

teacher collaboration becoming the core feature.

The teacher learning model we illustrated draws the special

qualities of the later two perspectives and structures thosewithin the framework of reflection. After working with school

districts in New York for implementing school-wide

instructional change in schools Elmore and Burney (1999)assert that a successful professional development, focuses on

concrete classroom applications of general ideas; it exposes

teachers to actual practice rather than to descriptions ofpractice; it offers opportunities for observation, critique, and

reflection (p. 263). In addition, Richardson (1994) proposes a

Reflection

Self Directed

Learning

Learning

through

Collaboration


18/31


collaborative and purposeful inquiry based professional

development with reflection as the core learning process.

Learning the Art of Reflection

The process of reflection is structured within a broadframework of reflective cycle as defined by Rodgers (2002) which

integrates different phases of reflection for teacher learning and

change. This model grew out of a federally funded professionaldevelopment project by Carol Rodgers(2002) known as Teacher

Knowledge Project and had two specific goals in this process. The

first is to develop their capacity to observe skillfully and to thinkcritically about students and their learning so they learn to consider

what this tells them about teaching, the subject matter and the context

in which all of these interact. The second goal is for them to begin totake intelligent action based on the understanding that emerges(Rodgers, 2002, p. 231, 232).

In this step teachers are able to reflect on their personalknowledge about student learning and what must be done to improve

teaching that would result in better student learning. The content for

teacher learning is generated by teachers reflecting his/her personalteaching experience. Their knowledge about student learning becomes

the starting point for their learning and is very different from the

traditional professional development programs. In this reflective

educational process teachers will consider the prismatic dimensionsof teaching and student learning that they encounter on a daily basis. It

focuses on teachers taking personal responsibility for learning and the

changes they have to initiate for themselves. Reflection is an effectiveprocess that would facilitate the nature of learning anticipated in the

mainstream classrooms. In addition, reflection provides for teachers

who are wondering and thinking about how best they can teach theirELL and SPED learners the grade level, a process to gain new

insights, knowledge and skills.


19/31

Margaret Solomon 57

Here reflection is viewed as an active learning process that can

be used by individual teachers or by a collaborative team of teachers in

order to bring the needed changes in their pedagogy and support thelearning of special needs learners.

The Reflective Process

This process entails four phases developed by Rodgers and

grew out of Deweys ideas of reflection (2002). After, all the goal ofreflection here is to help teachers learn ways of improving student

learning. The following diagram adopted from Rodgers (2002) gives

an overview of the process of reflection. Although this process seemslinear and structured, it does not have to be that way. It begins with

step 1 but steps 2 and 3 can be done interactively and recursively. Each

of the components will be explained and connected to the teaching ofELL and SPED learners.


20/31


Learning to See

Learning to reflect begins with learning to see details of their

teaching and student learning which is well described by the term

Presence in Experience. In this first step teachers are asked to cometo a state of mind that focuses on the ability to be present to students

learning and able to respond with the best possible next instructional

movethe more a teacher is present, the more she can perceive, themore she perceives, the greater the potential for an intelligent

response (Rodgers, 2002, p. 234) Mainstream teachers here learn to

be present in the moments of the teaching and learning that take place

concurrently for ELL and SPED learners in their classrooms. Teachersare guided in this step to develop his/her capacity for presence which

is described as a way to pay attention right here, right now, and to

invest in the present moment with full awareness and concentration

2

3

4

1Learning

to see

Learning todescribe &

differentiate

Think from

multiple

erspectives

Learning to take

intelligent action

through inquiry

Reflective

Cycle


21/31

Margaret Solomon 59

(Tremmel, l993, p. 433). This type of mind set allows teachers to see

exactly how the ELL and the SPED learners respond to their teaching.

In this initial step teachers learn to really see whats going on

for their students and about their teaching. It aims to metacognitivelyhelp them look at learning dilemmas of students in terms of moments

before teaching, while teaching and after teaching. This also providesan excellent opportunity for teachers to individually look into their

personal beliefs and attitudes about the students who are unlike the

regular students. For example, if teachers learn to purposefullydescribe an instructional moment when their ELL or SPED learner

was not able to do a given assignment in journals, they would be able

to metacognitively reflect on this particular instructional dilemma.While doing this, teachers are able to unpack their prior knowledge

and beliefs and inquire as to how they match in meeting the needs of

special learnersin the classroom. When they reflect their experience inthis type of writing, they are able to describe the dilemma underconsideration in detail allowing them think about their thinking of

their experience. This is a good example of an individual teacher

becoming a self-directed learner wanting to understand and tackle thelearning difficulties of his/her selected learner.

Learning to Describe and Differentiate

In the next phase teachers collaborate with other colleagues in

looking at different instructional dilemmas they face by describing the

teaching and learning events first then interpreting and differentiatingthem through a collaborative conversation. They bring various

selected moments of their teaching and share them with other

colleagues in the team. The purpose here is through collaboration todig up as many details as possible, from as many different angles

possible so that one is not limited to the sum of ones own

perceptions (Rodgers, 2002, p. 238). They also get feedback fromstudents about the teaching moment selected to understand the

difficulties they experienced. These detailed descriptions help teachers


22/31


to interpret the event from multiple points of view of the colleagues

with whom they are collaborating.

Teachers also dialogue with colleagues about the identified

teaching and learning dilemmas for ELL and Special needs learners.This can be considered as a collaborative critical dialogue (Costa &

Kallick, 2000). This dialogue is between the teacher and colleagueswhen they question one another about what was taught and learned

and what difficulties they experienced. In an atmosphere of trust,

well-crafted questions allow participants to reveal their insights,understandings, and thought processes ( Costa & Kallick, 2000, p. 3)

The dialogue continues until resolutions for the teaching dilemmas are

discussed and determined. If these types of collaborative activities aredone regularly in schools big changes will occur in the abilities and

instructional practice of teachers. An inclusive instructional

environment that supports the ELL and SPED learners will eventuallyemerge in the school.

Teachers also learn descriptive skills in describing classroom

events then interpret and even verify them by asking students to give

feedback. For example, let us picture a 7th grade social studies teacher

in her lesson on one of the topics related to U.S. Geography whorealized that three of her ELL and one LD student in the class did not

understand the text the class was reading because none of them were

able to write short responses to the five questions she asked on the

lesson. She describes this event in detail and brings it to the team ofcolleagues working with her. In addition, she also has the students

written work as the data to show that they did not achieve the learninggoal she had in mind. She also talks with those students and has them

explain why they were finding it difficult to answer the questions.

After looking at the details of the described event and the responsesshe collected from the students she looks at the event from different

perspectives drawn from her team members. Then, they interpret the

instructional event drawing implications for what she must do to


23/31

Margaret Solomon 61

improve her teaching. This is the exact purpose of the learning process

we are recommending here.

Analysis of Experience: Learning to think critically from multiple

views:

In this phase of analysis teachers generate collaborativelydifferent explanations about a selected teaching with colleagues.

Although it comes after description, there is often a dialectical

relationship between the two. During the analysis it is sometimesnecessary to return to the descriptive phase and seek more data, which

in turn may point toward different analyses (Rodgers, 2002, p. 244).

It is here teachers assumptions, prior knowledge and beliefs areunearthed making this a very essential part of reflection. The purpose

is to see how personal theories and assumptions about student learning

influence their teaching. In the case of teaching ELL and SPEDlearners, teachers will uncover their personal underlying attitudes andbeliefs. Those ideas become the content of discussion and analysis. By

describing and analyzing a selected teaching event for their special

learners, teachers not only would be reorganizing and reconstructingtheir experience but also thinking about an intelligent action (Rodgers,

2002).

The third phase provides the opportunity to bring some

solutions to the teaching and learning problems related to the

instruction of ELL and SPED students. Teachers learn new techniques

to remediate the teaching dilemmas they continually face with the ELLand SPED students. Their focus now is to learn to make instructional

adaptations within their grade level content in the elementary level and

within their content areas at the secondary level. They learn to makeadaptations first in the content standards for their grades and subject

areas, then they learn strategies to make instructional adaptations

while teaching regular students. In other words, they purposefullyselect strategies that would fit their lesson plan and prepare ahead of

time planning the total learning process. They also familiarize

themselves with the tasks involved in teaching the selected strategies


24/31


and implement them as they reflect about their teaching while

planning instruction, during instruction and after the instruction. They

do not stop here but take steps to inquire if their instructionaladaptations work efficiently.

Path of Inquiry

After the hard work of describing and analyzing teachers learn

to take intelligent action through inquiry. This inquiry is done mainly

for improving their teaching and student learning by gatheringconvincing evidences through a simple research process.

Experimentation is the final as well as the initial phase of the

reflective cycleat some point the ideas of action that teachers settleon must be tested in action... (Rodgers, 2002, p. 249). Teachers select

instructional adaptation strategies with specific goals of inquiry in

mind and see how they impact student learning by collecting variousevidences. Such an inquiry is called an action research which is adisciplined process of inquiry conducted by and for those taking

the action. The primary reason for engaging in action research is to

assist the actor in improving and/or refining his/her actions Sagor,2000, 4).

Mainstream teachers can analyze the effectiveness ofinstructional adaptations they make for ELL and SPED learners using

the action research process. In fact action research serves as key to

improving teaching. Calhoun (1994) lists various definitions of action

research highlighting the importance of improving teaching. Actionresearch is a process by which practitioners attempt to study their

problems scientifically in order to guide, correct, and evaluate their

decisions and actions.

Thus action research in education is study conducted by

colleagues in a school setting of the results of their activities toimprove instruction


25/31

Margaret Solomon 63

Action research is a fancy way of saying, Lets study whats

happening at our school and decide how to make it a better place (p.

20).

The following diagram depicts the steps in the action research process. It is shown as a continuous recurring process allowing

teachers to continue their interventions for improving their teaching.

Action Research Cycle

1

Select

Area

4

Analyze/

Interpret

Data

Integrate

practice

2

Take

Action

3

CollectData

This sort of inquiry begins with a selected instructionalproblem arising from the mainstream classroom. In the first three steps

of the reflective process discussed earlier, the problem and action to

remediate are determined. In the experimentation phase, the plannedintervention is implemented and observed to see if it brings out the

expected outcomes for the learners. Action research can be done

individually or collaboratively depending on the selected focus of theinquiry. Mainstream teachers can undertake simple individual inquiries


26/31


testing to see if selected adapted strategies work for their ELL and

SPED learners and help them achieve the expected academic goals of

the grade level content.

This encompassing teacher professional development processis captured in the following example. Ms. Rogers, a high school

science teacher while teaching a lesson sees a puzzled ELL who couldnot follow his/her directions for the class activity. She recognizes this

incident as a dilemma and reflects on the details of that teaching

moment in a journal. She then describes the incident moment bymoment in a journal and decides to use a specific instructional

adaptation strategy to avoid such a moment again for that student.

Afterward she goes to his/her teacher mentor or a team member andcarries on a critical dialogue about the teaching challenges faced

asking the why and how questions. Following that an intervention

strategy is selected which she implements and inquires if it works forthe student by observing student reactions, and the quality of theirlearning tasks they complete. Then this teacher analyzes the

information she/he gathers on student learning and evaluates to see if

any improvement in student learning occurred as a result of theselected strategy she applied. If it does not bring the expected

outcomes, she modifies her instructional technique and evaluates the

student results again. This brief example shows all the steps taken inthis recommended reflective learning process for teachers.

The teacher learning process envisioned here is intended to

provide opportunities for teachers to develop new beliefs, attitudes andpractice as they design and implement adaptation strategies because it

is rooted in self and group reflection. School leadership must take the

responsibility to provide this type of learning for teachers. That mightmean changes in the school schedule and organization, whatever it

might be. Unless the school leaders recognize the importance of

teacher learning and make it a priority in their budget the learning ofELL and SPED learners will continue to be marginalized. Teachers

should be supported to take the necessary steps to teach adaptation

strategies, not as a set of separate skills but as part of their regular


27/31

Margaret Solomon 65

teaching. If teachers are given this type of reflective process oriented

learning opportunities, there is a greater chance they will acquire new

beliefs, attitudes and knowledge about teaching ELL and SPEDlearners in the mainstream classrooms.

Therefore mainstream teachers are asked to access a larger setof skills and tools to meet the diverse learning needs of his/her

students (Sacco, 2002) In as much we have become a nation of

educators that support and embrace the philosophy of inclusivenessand equal educational expectations, our choice is to go forward with

the vision of making the mainstream classroom a special learning

place that is designed to teach all learners including the ELL andSpecial Needs learners by making instructional adaptations for them.

All the pedagogical challenges that come from lack of English

language proficiency and the innate learning needs that arise fromdisabilities have to be faced head on by the mainstream teacherthrough a path of learning and envisioning new possibilities for their

learners with special learning needs.


28/31


REFERENCES

American Federation of Teachers (1995).Principles for professional

development. Washington DC: Author.Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking (eds) (1999).How people learn:

Brain, mind, experience, and school,New York, NY:National Academy Press.

Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid (1989). Situated cognition and

culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-43.Cohen, D.K., & Barnes, C. (1993). Conclusion: A new pedagogy for

policy. In D.K. Cohen, M.. W. McLaughlin, & J. E. Talbert

(Eds.), Teaching for understanding. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass Incorporated.

Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Getting into the habit of reflection.

Educational Leadership, 57(7), 60-62.Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in

promoting educational success for language minority students.

In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling

and language minority students: A theoretical framework.

Los Angeles: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment

Center California State University.

Cummins, J. (1996). Negotiating identities: Education for

empowerment in a diverse society. Los Angeles: California

Association for Bilingual Education.

Cummins, J. (2001). Second language teaching for academic success:

A framework for school language policy development. A Paperincluded in theStaff Development Resources TrainingManual on Accelerating Second Language and Literacy

Development, Torrance, CA: Staff Development Resources.Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). From Separate but Equal to No Child

Left Behind:The collision of new standards and old

inequalities. In D. Meir, & et. al. (Eds.),Many children left

behind. Boston, MA: Bacon Press.


29/31

Margaret Solomon 67

Davaney, K., & Sykes, G. (l988). Making the case for

professionalization. In A. Liberman (Ed.),Building aprofessional culture in schools. New York, NY: TeachersCollege Press.

Elmer, R. F., & Burney, D. (1999). Staff development and instructionalimprovement. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.),

Teaching as the learning profession. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass Incorporated.

Frankenstein, M. (l983). Critical mathematics education: An

application of Paulo Freires epistemology.Journal of

Education, 165 (4). Boston: Trustees of Boston University.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY:

Seabury Press.Green, T. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Huberman, M. (1993) . The model of the independent artisan inteachers professional relations. In J. Little & M. McLaughlin(Eds.), Teachers work: Individuals, colleagues, andcontexts. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Kennedy, M. (1991). An agenda for research on teacher learning(NCRTL Special Report).East Lansing, MI: National Center

for Research on Teacher Learning, Michigan State University.

Kirk, S., & Gallagher, J. (l983).Educating exceptional children.Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Kottler, E., & Kottler, J. (2002). Children with limited English:Teaching strategies for the regular classroom. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Incorporated.Leyser, Y. (2001). Are attitudes and practices regarding mainstreaming

changing? A case of teachers in two rural school districts.

Education, 121(4), 751-600.Merrit, S. (2001). Clearing the hurdles of inclusion.Educational

Leadership, 59(3), 67-70.

The Nations Report Card (2005). National assessment of

educational progress. Nation Center for Educational Statistics.

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard


30/31


Noddings, N. (1990). Feminist critiques in the professions. In C.

Cazden (ed.),Review of research in education. Washington

DC: American Educational Research Association.Poplin, M., & Weeres, J. (1992). Voices from the inside: A report on

schooling from in the classroom.. Claremont: CA: TheInstitute for Education in Transformation at the

Claremont Graduate School.Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers

learning? Two fourth-grade teachers use of a new mathematics

text. The Elementary School Journal, 100 (4), 331-351.Richardson, V. (1994). The consideration of teachers beliefs. In V.

Richardson (ed.), Teacher change and the staff developmentprocess: A case in reading instruction. New York, NY:Teachers College.

Richardson, V., & Hamilton, M. (1994). The practical argument staff

development process. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Teacherchange and the staff development Process: A case in reading

instruction. New York, NY: Teachers College.

Rodgers, C. R. (2002). Voices inside schools. Harvard Educational

Review, 72(2).Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (1994). Reading as a meaning-

construction process: The reader, the text, and the teacher. In

R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical

models and processes of reading. IRA: New Directions

Publishing Corporation.

Schon, D. A. (1987).Educating the reflective practitioner. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Incorporated.Sagor. R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development.Sacco, J. (2002). Special needs solutions.Instructor,112(4), 1-2.

Senge, P. (2000).Schools that learn. New York, NY: Doubleday Dell

Publishing Group, Incorporated.

Sykes, G. (1999). Teacher and student learning: Strengthening their

connection. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.),


31/31

Margaret Solomon 69

Teaching as the learningprofession. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass Incorporated.

Tremmel, R. (1993). Zen and the art of reflective practice in teachereducation.Harvard Educational Review, 63(4).

Weiss, C. (1995). The four Is of school reform: Interests, ideology,information, and institution.Harvard Educational Review,65

(4), 571-590.

3 solomon - national forum journals - dr. kritsonis

Documents