Title: Personalized Learning in the Middle School Classroom
Author Name: Alaia Alston
1. Introduction
Personalized learning can be interpreted and implemented in various ways; local schools and districts emphasize some aspects of personalized learning more than others. Grant and Basye describe personalized learning as using different strategies and approaches to help students reach individual learning goals. This can be accomplished by creating a blended learning environment that includes direct instruction, adaptive software, individualized learning plans, and competency-based models of instruction.
Supporters of personalized learning argue that the increased use of technology keeps students engaged and allows teachers to analyze student data easily. Personalized learning works well and can be implemented in conjunction with other instructional practices such as flipped learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, and game-based learning. Personalized learning has also been associated with the “whole child approach” that focuses on the learner’s intellectual abilities and their social, emotional, and physical developments.
Critics of personalized learning believe that the approach provides students with less time to interact and collaborate with peers, makes it more difficult for teachers to keep up with state and district-mandated pacing guides, increases screen time, and gives the technology industry too much influence in the classroom. In addition, there is an equity issue with this approach as studies have shown that students in schools with abundant resources participate in learning activities that are more hands-on and project-based. In contrast, students with fewer resources spend more time interacting with adaptive computer-based programs.
The following case study focuses on a public school teacher named Ms. K, who works in metro Atlanta as a middle-level science and social studies teacher. Ms. K wants to implement elements of personalized learning while also adhering to the curriculum and pacing guide provided by her school district.
2. Overview of the Case
Ms. K teaches approximately 150 students with varying abilities over five class periods. She has four periods of sixth-grade earth science and one period of eighth-grade Georgia studies. Ms. K uses a variety of strategies to help her students grow and master the content. One of her favorite instructional strategies is station teaching, where students are split into groups of 4-6 as they rotate through four different activities related to the standard. Every Friday, Ms. K assesses her students on what they have learned from the station activities.
Ms. K’s current stations are as follows:
Station 1: Moby Max– Students spend 20 minutes on an adaptive learning program to help close learning gaps
Station 2: Reading Comprehension- Students read articles from Readworks and NewsELA (Ms. K uses data collected on her student’s Lexile ranges when choosing articles)
Station 3: Writing Practice- Students respond to scenarios, journal prompts, or images related to the content.
Station 4: Hands-On – Students engage in a creative project or hands-on lab activity.
Ms. K is concerned because the stations she has implemented have not effectively engaged students or increased their performance on the NWEA MAP Assessment, an adaptive assessment students take in the fall, winter, and spring. Ms. K would like to adjust her instruction to include more rigorous, individualized learning experiences for her students.
3. Solutions Implemented
As Ms. K worked to create a more personalized learning environment for her students, she wanted to include the following elements of personalized learning:
- Learning Style Inventory
- Blended Learning
- Data Talks
- Choice Boards
- Adaptive Learning Programs
Ms. K first surveyed her to learn more about their learning styles. She found that 60% of her students were tactile learners, 15% were visual learners, and 25% were auditory learners. Ms. K used this information as she assembled instructional materials and experiences.
Blended learning combines direct face-to-face instruction with technology and online learning experiences. Ms. K has found technology beneficial as students often switch between face-to-face and virtual instruction since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. She used platforms such as Google Classroom, Screencastify, and Youtube to engage and challenge her students.
Data talks involve a discussion between the teacher and student. Ms. K dedicated one day a month to meet with each student to discuss their SMART goals and to provide feedback on their progress and performance in class. NWEA allows teachers to pull reports that can be shared with students and their parents.
Choice boards are activities that help students display mastery of the content and allow students to choose activities that align with their learning style. Ms. K assigned choice boards at the end of each unit to encourage creativity and the opportunity for students to apply what they have learned to real-world situations.
Ms. K decided to continue using Moby Max with her students and incorporated MAP Skills, which is similar to the mandated MAP assessment. Adaptive programs allow Ms. K to provide remediation for struggling students or a challenge for those who displayed mastery of the content.
4. Outcomes
Ms. K’s adjustments to her instructional strategies proved effective with her students. Instead of stations, Ms. K would begin the units with a mini-lesson then students would use what they learned to complete performance tasks. The difficulty and extent of the performance task would depend on data collected from MAP Skills. Students responded well to data talks; they had a deeper understanding of their goals and the ability to set new ones. Data talks also helped to build a supportive classroom community. On the contrary, she saw minimal improvements in her student’s classroom assessment scores. Ms. K believes that she was so focused on creating personalized learning experiences on classwork that she neglected to create her assessments in the same way. Moving forward, Ms. K will focus on implementing personalized learning in all aspects of her instruction.
5. Implications
In summary, personalized learning is beneficial for students. It provides opportunities for them to engage in experiences tailored to their learning styles, use technology in meaningful ways, reflect on their performance, set goals, and make choices about their learning. Ms. K learned to reflect on her instructional strategies when she didn’t get the results she wanted and taught her students to do the same.
References
Herold, B. (2021, January 15). What is personalized learning? Education Week. Retrieved December 6, 2021, from https://www.edweek.org/technology/what-is-personalized-learning/2019/11.
Howton, R. (2021, September 24). Turn your classroom into a personalized learning environment. ISTE. Retrieved December 4, 2021, from https://www.iste.org/explore/personalized-learning/turn-your-classroom-personalized-learning-environment.
Kamenetz, A., Feinberg, R., & Mason, K. C. (2018, November 16). The future of learning? well, it’s personal. NPR. Retrieved December 3, 2021, from https://www.npr.org/2018/11/16/657895964/the-future-of-learning-well-it-s-personal http://www.wholechildeducation.org/about/.
Personalized learning: A guide for engaging students with … (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2021, from https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/education/k12-personalized-learning-guidebook.pdf.