DIFFERENTIATION ( The very able child on the autistic spectrum-test. )
Statement of Focus:
Many schools teach in mixed ability groupings across the curriculum, both at Key ‘Stage 3 and 4. In others, Core subjects may be taught in ability sets, whilst Foundation subjects are taught in mixed ability groups. Government policy is for “inclusion” wherever possible, for those with physical disabilities, and, more relevant to this essay, for pupils with learning difficulties. This essay will explore the issue of differentiation in the classroom and whole-school context, specifically for the very able pupil who is on the autistic spectrum. Such cases may be rare, but present a real challenge to the teacher. However, very able pupils are to be found in most mixed ability classes to varying levels, and pupils with Asberger Syndrome (on the Autistic spectrum) or Autistic, are not uncommon in secondary schools and deserve the understanding necessary to help them learn and progress as every other child in school. In current parlance “Every Child Matters” and schools are expected to have policies in place on this issue. In the words of Ian Gilbert (Gilbert 2002: 29), `each child should be encouraged to do the best it can without reference to any other child.’ The questions arising are:
• What strategies can be employed to stretch very able pupils.
• Are schools equipped to help pupils with complex needs.
• Can teachers cope with the personalised learning needed.
The Personal Inspiration for this Focus
The pupil I shadowed for one day, and whom I shall refer to as Z for protection purposes, is known to be on the Autistic spectrum, with Asberger Syndrome. He also has a very high IQ. However, this is coupled with a very poor writing ability, well below his numerical age. According to school staff, he is a kinetic, (or kinaesthetic) learner, preferring to move about and work into materials than sit and endure didactic teaching and writing. Despite his poor writing ability, Z exhibited his high IQ in several other ways whilst I shadowed him; he communicated well, liking to give his strong opinions (always seeing things in a very black and white way and unable to accommodate other points of view) in discussion, responding to issues and questions slowly and thoughtfully. He picked up key words quickly and was able to use them verbally. In maths he had already worked out formulae in his head before the teacher had explained them; similarly, in History, although failing to read well (avoiding it if possible) or write things down, he worked out the codes the group were asked to decipher quickly and easily in his head and instructed the others in his group on the answers so he could avoid writing them down – the others did that for him. Z’s body language was expressive, but he lacked facial and tonal expression, disliking group games or activities. (See Appendix 1).
Z clearly displayed the following learning characteristics of a gifted pupil as defined by the dfes:
• Be verbally fluent for their age.
• Give quick verbal responses.
• Prefer verbal to written activities.
• Be logical.
• Have an ability to work things out in their head very quickly.
• Have strong ideas and opinions.
• Focus on their own interests rather than what is being taught.
• Be easily bored by what they perceive as routine tasks.
• Not necessarily well-behaved or well-liked by others
(www.standards.dfes.gov.uk: 2007)
In summary, Z is a quick thinker, showing what Howard Gardner, in his theories on `multiple intelligences’ (Gardner 1983) identified as `Logical/Mathematical Intelligence’, defined by Brooks, Abbott and Bills (2004) as `the ability to use reason, logic and numbers. These learners think conceptually in logical and numerical patterns, making connections between pieces of information. They ask lots of questions and like to do experiments.’
Findings:
Z provides us with a conundrum – highly intelligent, yet with specific learning difficulties (SLD). Our secondary schools have Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators (SENCOs) with an infrastructure of support for pupils with learning difficulties. More recently, since 1999 when a House of Commons Select Committee report `Highly Able Children’ was complied, attention has been focused on `gifted and talented’ pupils. The government, supported by many educationalists, felt these pupils had not been stretched enough academically in the past and had been let down by the school system. There is no doubt that SEN departments in schools perform a much needed and very worthy function; however, for pupils like Z, do our SEN systems become chains to bind, not life-enhancing experiences? In an article in the Times Educational Supplement, Professor John MacBeath acknowledges that, despite a growing acceptance of Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory, most schools are unable (or unwilling) to support it practically. He writes:
Imagine a school ….. which really understands and nurtures the unique
intelligences profile of each individual child, each with areas of great potential
strength and learning difficulties. (MacBeath 1997)
He goes on to point out:
Gardner has studied creative, exceptional minds. All of his exceptional minds
were singularly deficient in some areas and played to their strengths in one or
two others. Many great thinkers and inventors were abysmal failures at school.
…people will look back … and laugh at the “uniform school”, which thought it
could teach the same things to all children at the same time and in the same
way. (MacBeath 1997)
This, I believe, lies at the heart of differentiation; all people, for a multiplicity of reasons are different and learn best in a particular way. John Wooden, an American basketball coach, puts it another way:
There is nothing wrong in striving for an `A’ mark and wanting to win a contest,
but we must face the fact that we are not all created equally as far as mental and
physical ability is concerned, we are not all raised in the same environment, we
will not all have the same foundation in English or in athletics and we will not all
have the same facilities with which to work. (Wooden cited in Gilbert 2002: 31-
32)
This is all very well, of course, but some classes may have 30+ mixed ability learners in them, so we have to look for more generic solutions in most cases. For rarities like Z, a realistic and achievable whole-school framework for his specific development needs to be constructed and applied appropriately by individual subject areas. This is time consuming for teachers and has a knock-on effect on the rest of the class, who may resent the `special’ treatment of one of its members.
For the majority of gifted and talented pupils, schools have explored various strategies with some success. In order to progress, pupils need to feel comfortable with what they know already – prior knowledge – and accept the challenge of the new. Those who are particularly able will not only accept this challenge, but welcome it and enjoy it, even pressing the teacher to push them further. `Gifted and talented pupils need to be given opportunities to study some, or all, subjects to a greater depth and breadth and, sometimes, at a faster pace,’ (www,teachernet,gov.uk: 2007).
The difficulty of the high ability learner is that of being accepted by their peers, and it is an often recorded phenomenon that able pupils purposely underachieve to gain acceptance. Feeling `different’ to their peers can affect pupils’ self esteem and self-confidence. This is a separate, but interesting issue, however. The challenge of learning for the most able, is to take risks, apply their existing knowledge and `experience the thrill of being discoverers’ (Overall & Sangster, 2007: 78). They may extend their learning empirically or through research, or through problem solving situations. Whilst all pupils should be challenged to progress, the most able need to do this at a higher level than other pupils in the class. They will tackle a problem in considerably more depth than most, `where pupils are following a common curriculum but the most able use more challenging resources and are asked questions that require higher levels of thinking’ (www.teachernet.gov.uk: 2007). This can make their work at first glance seem to develop more slowly than some, but less able pupils will be working at a more superficial level. The least able will often `complete’ a task in a very short time and be asking for something else to do.
Some Professional Solutions
Experienced staff, on being questioned, felt the need to produce a number of short, sharp tasks for the less able to keep their focus on a topic, especially when the middle ability range and the most able would be concentrating more fully and developing more searching solutions to problems offered to them. The potential pitfall of `boredom’ is an important one to avoid and this seems to occur at both ends of the ability spectrum; lower ability pupils experience boredom because they lack understanding of the issues and topics presented to them and, whilst TAs are invaluable in this respect, there are financial restraints in education which mean that TAs are in rather short supply. The able pupils in classes of mixed ability either grasp concepts, techniques and facts easily, or know about them already. In either case, a bored pupil is the outcome without extra provision. This seemed to be the case in most subject areas, including (or most particularly) the more `creative’ subjects.
To have a high level of ability is nothing without self motivation to go hand in hand with it. `No-one reaches the top of their chosen field simply by having talent. Studies of people who have become outstanding performers almost invariably show that the common factor in all their lives has been a high degree of motivation.’ (Leyden 2002: 53) In differentiating by task, by teacher input or even by outcome, the teacher must inspire and motivate for the learning to have any impact or meaning, even, or especially, to the most able. Their abilities must be carefully nurtured and provided with challenge at every stage of their education
One teacher interviewed provided pupils with `Schemes of Work’ which gave each pupil control over what they were expected to do over an extended project. These, in turn, were differentiated, so that pupils were offered a choice of `route’. This was done to avoid pupils feeling stigmatised in any way by being given, for instance, the easiest (read lowest) `route’. Apparently, most pupils chose wisely, and seldom needed a tactful word (in private) advising them to change. This system was used at KS3 and at KS4. This enabled the gifted pupils to be sufficiently challenged and to become more autonomous learners, as the hardest `route’ involved much more personal research and experimentation.
This approach highlights what may, by some, be considered potential problems in mixed ability teaching. Without careful planning, able pupils can find themselves going at a pace inappropriately slow for their talents, or possibly repeating similar exercises for the benefit of less able pupils. Good structuring avoids these difficulties, providing an ethos in which each pupil can develop at their own pace and benefit from the contributions of all abilities to the work ethic.
Stretching the Very Able:
There is still the question of how very able pupils can be stretched to achieve their full potential. `By using a variety of methods, both within the school and outside, effective provision for able and talented children can be greatly enhanced.’ (Teare 197 cited in Leyden 2002: 86). Given even the best differentiation in the classroom there is still scope for greater challenge and development in many cases. Arranging enrichment programmes for the gifted and talented appears to be the most acceptable and effective way to promote the full innate ability of these pupils (www.teachernet.gov.uk: 2007). These programmes may take a number of forms; residential courses providing a group of like-minded pupils from around the county with an intense three or four days high-level activity in a particular subject area seem always to be successful practically, academically and socially – it is important that very able pupils should not feel isolated in their talents. `Master Classes’ provided by universities and colleges on Saturdays of after school also work well for the pupils co-opted onto them. Further activities can take place on the school premises, such as specific workshops where pupils are taken off normal timetable for a day or so and taught by outside experts, and school clubs, which will attract pupils of all abilities, but each will work at his or her own pace and within their own special interests.
Reflections and Conclusions:
Where does all this leave Z (Q1, Q10)? Sharp enough in his questioning to put teachers on the spot, yet unable to put his thoughts successfully down on paper? On the Autistic spectrum, a pupil like Z has the need for routine and a dislike –almost amounting to a fear – of change. As with others like him, Z dislikes group activity and leads a quite isolated existence amidst the hustle and bustle of school life, working alone whenever possible. It may be possible to tailor an extra-curricular club situation to suit him, but would he attend? For certain, residential activities away from his known surroundings would not be appropriate, nor would a trip to a strange university every week. It may seem that subject teachers must take full responsibility with such a pupil for stretching his intellect and abilities to their full potential. Because of the nature of Autism, some may believe that the computer is a good solution to educational and perhaps social problems! `Computers are predictable’(Hardy, Ogden, Newman, Cooper 2002: 23), they also lack emotional expression and do not try to make friends, but does this make them the solution to the needs of Autistic spectrum sufferers?
Far better, I believe, Z, in common with other very able pupils might find he can take advantage of mentoring (Q10, Q19), if a mentor can be found whom Z trusts:
To be effective, mentors need to be clear about the purpose of their involvement
with particular pupil and, ideally, to have received some training for their role.
There needs to be an explicit agreement about the nature, timing and duration of
the contact. ….. Mentors need to be able to use a range of skills in questioning,
challenging and support and to be able to develop a good relationship with the
pupil. (Leyton 202: 95-96)
Usually, schools appoint mentors to pupils –they could be teachers, support staff or sixth form students – when pupils reach KS4. However, why should there not be exceptions in exceptional circumstances? Z is an avid questioner, desiring both to find out about things and to trip teachers up! Educational conversations with a sympathetic senior, whether teacher or older student, may help him reach the potential his intelligence suggests.
Exceptional pupils need exceptional responses from their schools. Every child, we recognise, is individual in their needs and in our expectations of them, in the way they learn and in the way we teach them. Differentiation is accepted as standard practice by most schools and teachers and the practice has been analysed and written about extensively. It is well known that we differentiate by teacher input, by task and by outcome. This is all important and, needless to say, if done successfully, time-consuming and hard work, but rewarding in its successes. Attention is often focused on those with learning difficulties when we consider differentiation and, as recognised by the government of 1999, for a long time too little attention and planning was afforded to the able pupils, often disaffected, underachieving and bored. This essay has sought to consider the need for effective differentiation for these able pupils but, in the light of the experience of shadowing a pupil with complex needs, it has also attempted to consider and suggest solutions for the able pupil with specific learning difficulties.
TO FOLLOW:
Will or how technology might aid students: Please see TAGS for ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment