Challenging Excellence Gaps Through Personalized Learning: Meeting Needs, Assessing Growth
Authors:
Pamela Clinkenbeard, Professor of Educational Foundations, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Ann Franke, WASCD Member Services Co-chair and Director of Instruction in the Verona Area School District
Amy Miller, Advanced Learners Coordinator in the Oregon School District
We are all familiar with achievement gaps. There is widespread agreement that the gap between the achievement of advantaged and less advantaged students should be narrowed and that the goal should be to help all students reach proficiency (at least). But what is an excellence gap? This is the distance (even greater than the achievement gap) between the proportions of lower and higher income students who are achieving at advanced levels (above and beyond proficiency). Plucker and his colleagues (Plucker, Hardesty, & Burroughs, 2013) found that low-income and minority students were much less likely to reach advanced levels of proficiency on state or national assessments than were their White and more advantaged peers. In Wisconsin, there are substantial excellence gaps for Black, Hispanic, and students eligible for free/reduced lunch. Wisconsin received a grade of “D” for inputs (state policies that support advanced achievement and gifted education) and “C+” for outputs (achievement scores and excellence gaps compared to other states) in a recent report from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation. (See also Plucker et al., 2015.)
Excellence Gaps and Gifted Education
Students of color and low-income students are often underrepresented in services and programming for advanced students, including gifted programs. In Wisconsin, programming for all advanced students is inconsistent at best, although mandated by standard t. Statute 121.02(1)(t) states “Each school board shall provide access to an appropriate program for students identified as gifted and talented.” Statute 118.35 and Rule 8.01(2)(t)2 describe the five areas of giftedness (general intellectual, specific academic, leadership, creativity, and visual/performing arts) and the need to use multiple measures and culturally-responsive practices in identification and programming for gifted students. (See the DPI site for “gifted and talented pupils.”) Nationally, efforts to meet the needs of gifted and talented students have been shifting from pull-out or self-contained “programs” for identified students to broader attempts to identify the needs of students and provide for them in the regular classroom when possible. The emphasis is on identifying needs (what does this student need in order to meet their potential?) rather than identifying students (is this student gifted or not?). Differentiation of instruction is an important component of this effort, and gifted education fits into the RtI framework. The Wisconsin RtI Center has developed a research-supported database of “additional challenges,” practices and materials in math and language arts for advanced learners . However, even with comprehensive professional development for instructional staff, in-class differentiation cannot meet all the needs of all advanced students.
Some school districts are looking at “personalized learning” (PL) frameworks as a way to meet the needs of gifted/talented/advanced students, and to nurture and develop the gifts of all students. There are numerous models and examples of personalized learning approaches, but most include the goal of tailoring the educational environment to each student’s needs, skills, and interests. (For a working definition of personalized learning including four main components, click here.) For those who have embraced PL, the emphases on individualized pacing and content, student college and career goals, and learner motivation and engagement seem highly appropriate for meeting the needs of gifted students. But how does it work, and what does it look like? At the end of this article are the stories of two districts: one has been meeting the needs of “advanced learners” within personalized learning for several years, and one is just starting to explore the process of shifting from a more traditional GT program.
Assessment Issues
There are unique issues in assessing learning and growth for students who are already achieving at high levels. In addition to the excellence gap issue, there is the difficulty of demonstrating student growth. Lack of demonstrated growth in high ability students can be due to several factors. One problem area can be the assessments themselves. If districts monitor progress and assess achievement with instruments that have inadequate “ceiling,” then growth will not show up for already-high achievers. (If you’re already scoring at the top of an assessment that was not challenging for you, then there is nowhere to go to improve.) Another assessment-related issue is “regression toward the mean.” All assessment scores for an individual fluctuate, and a score that is high in the fall may (purely through statistical artifact) regress to a slightly lower score in the spring.
The second main reason for difficulty in demonstrating growth is in the curriculum itself. If students are not challenged with appropriately difficult material and tasks, they cannot grow. We probably all agree that every student should demonstrate at least a year’s growth in a year of schooling, but this often does not happen with gifted students. This is a particular trouble spot with students of color and those from poverty. They are likely to be overlooked when teachers are nominating students for advanced opportunities, even in the many cases where they could succeed with only a little assistance. Vygotsky’s “zone of proximal development” (ZPD) is relevant here: in order to be engaged and to grow, all students need to be working at levels that they have not yet mastered, but that they are capable of mastering with some peer or adult scaffolding. Students who are never challenged can become complacent and unmotivated, and are unlikely to learn to develop good work habits.
Using Personalized Learning to Meet Advanced Student Needs: District Stories
Two school districts’ stories illustrate some of the specifics of implementing personalized learning and meeting the needs of advanced and gifted students within a PL framework. The Oregon School District has been developing the process for a few years now; the Verona Area School District recently began incorporating planning for gifted students in their PL process.
The Oregon School District Advanced Learning and Personalized Learning Journey
Amy Miller, Advanced Learners Coordinator
The Oregon School District gifted and talented program of supports has been in place since 1990. In 2008, after a program evaluation, we moved to a new program of supports focused on rigorous curriculum (in many cases developed for advanced learners) and social and emotional learning. In 2012, with full support of our Board of Education, we changed the title of staff and the supports we offer to Advanced Learning to reflect current best practices in the field. Since 2008, we have measured success for our learners using growth measures with our goal of a minimum of a year’s growth for our learners.
After a series of “visioning into the future” papers written by our school board of education, in the 2011-12 school year, a personalized learning task force was convened as a best practice to provide opportunities to maximize the potential of all students based on their needs, abilities and preferences. The Personalized Learning initiative has had profound effects on student learning and teacher understanding of the new role of an educator in a personalized learning model. Today, identification of advanced learning needs is ongoing with collaboration between administrators, grade level teacher/facilitators and Advanced Learning staff with a focus on maximizing growth. Personalization has also helped to identify advanced learning needs in our less advantaged learners or learners with twice exceptional needs that a one size fits all model would not have identified or been able to support. As our personalization initiative continues to expand we see our learners becoming empowered and driving their own education as teachers become collaborative facilitators of learning.
Next steps in the Oregon School District are continuing our professional development series for staff district wide, at the building level and in collaborative teams. We are also working to develop for all curricular areas a continuum of learning skills/standards which will support all learners (including our advanced learners) to move at the depth and pace that maximizes their learning. Finally, our Personalized Learning task force (which includes, staff, parents and students) will continue to meet to celebrate successes, discuss next steps and to evaluate our long term strategic plan for full implementation with a goal of maximizing learning and success of all students.
The Verona Area School District Personalized Learning Journey
Ann Franke, Director of Instruction
The Verona Area School District began the process of moving to a personalized learning model in 2013 with the school board establishing the goal of every student having a personalized learning plan by the beginning of the 2018 – 19 school year. Personalized learning is meant to be a vehicle to achieve the district’s ultimate mission: Every Student Must be Successful! While the ideals of personalized learning have been widely embraced by the community, some parents and students have questioned what the implementation means for advanced learners. Some of the questions parents have posed include: Does personalized learning mean my child will have to “teach” him or herself instead of receiving direct instruction? Will my child be expected to “teach” other children who are not able to grasp concepts as easily? Will my child be held back in any way as the needs of other learners are being met?
These questions all point to the need for clearly defining what personalized learning looks like in our district, a process we began over the last school year by developing the Verona Area School District Personalized Learning Plan which delineates the key elements: The Profile (who the learner is); The Path (what the learner does); The Evidence (how the learner is progressing); and The Reflection (where the learner goes next). We also recognize the need for increased professional development for our staff so we have created two foundational courses: The Who, What, WOW, Where, and Why (5 W’s) of Personalized Learning, and Introduction to the Verona Area School District Personalized Learning Plan. In addition, communication to our families about the benefits of personalized learning for all students, including our advanced learners, will be a high priority over the upcoming school year. This will include a Frequently Asked Questions document, information on our website and newsletters, a VASD personalized learning video, and a “parent version” of the Introduction to the VASD Personalized Learning Plan.
Conclusion
Personalized Learning holds promise for meeting the needs of all students, including those who need more challenge than is typical at grade level. Its emphasis on treating each student as a unique individual means that students who have both gifts and challenges may find that, rather than being labeled only as a member of a particular group that needs assistance, they also will have their talents appreciated and nurtured.
References
Plucker, J., Giancola, J., Healey, G., Arndt, D., & Wang, C. (2015). Equal talents, unequal opportunities: A report card on state support for academically talented low-income students. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.
Plucker, J. A., Hardesty, J., & Burroughs, N. (2013). Talent on the sidelines: Excellence gaps and America’s persistent talent underclass. Storrs, CT: Center for Education Policy Analysis, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut.
Comments (1)
-
Guest (Chris Van Hoof)
PermalinkI really appreciated the specific district examples. They demonstrate that a clear plan for Personalized Learning, with board and administrative support, takes time, but with slow and steady progress, great things can happen for ALL kids, including our most advanced learners.
0 Like
Leave your comments