Engaging Learners Using a Multi-sensory Approach

When creating lessons for my students it is critical that I know their interests, and understand their unique learner needs. My students have dual sensory loss issues in both vision and hearing. They also have gross and fine motor challenges as well as medical needs. In order to engage them I customize the curriculum so that they will have optimal opportunities to access and participate.

This curriculum was designed to meet standards across the curriculum in the areas of math, literacy, and science in order to meet the needs required for the MCAS alternative portfolio process. For my students it is important when designing materials that I keep their vision and hearing needs in mind. Bright, bold and contrasting colors work best to attract visual interest. There are items on the boards for the students to explore through touch, sight, and sound and I will soon be making one incorporating smell (stay-tunes for boards 11-15). 

 This board was designed thinking about the interests of my student who loves the slinky and another

student who loves things that move. 

Universal Design Learning (UDL) principles of multiple means of representation are exemplified. 

How many ways can we represent the number 5?

 My student's vision issues (CVI - cortical visual impairment) require bold, 

contrasting color presentations. Many students with CVI are attracted to orange, yellow, and red colors. The Wikki Stix is used to offer a tactile representation of the concept of 3+3.

Recycled bottle caps are used in board number 8 to attract the interest of my student who loves shiny and reflective items. 

Board number 9 was made with bells found at the Dollar Store. My student with a cochlear implant enjoys the sound of the bells.

  

The black background for board number ten is a plastic clipboard folder found at the Dollar Store. The contrasting black and white colors attract my students visual attention. 

The Sensory Trees is a fun project to engage in at 

this time of year. It engages students using all the senses appealing 

to the mode of learning that most attracts the individual student. 

 Recycled materials as well as dollar store finds were used to create the materials. In Massachusetts  a company, Flexcon, https://www.flexcon.com/About-Us/SchoolStock.aspx is a great resource providing teachers free materials for use in their classrooms.  

With the right approach anything is possible! So get creative, have some fun, teach to the interests of your students and they will engage!

Selecting apps with UDL guidelines in mind for MCAS alternate portfolio assessment

Why incorporate the use of the iPad as a tool for learning? The iPad as a tool engages my students. It is accessible and due to the portability factor it can be used in all settings. With accessories such as stands it can be positioned exactly as needed for visual and motor needs. In addition the iPad has built in accessibility features that allow for complete customization based on unique learner needs. Luis Perez has created some great video tutorials demonstrating the built in  accessibility features in IOS 7. There is a link for these tutorials under UDL links tab on the right.  

My students are considered 4th grade based on chronological age. My goal this year is to more fully engage my students in the learning process by integrating the use of the iPad in lessons as a tool for accessing learning and assessment. Specific apps in the following content areas: writing, reading comprehension, vocabulary acquisition and use, operations and algebraic thinking, and number and operations-fractions, will be carefully selected to engage and enhance learning and assessment opportunities.

With consideration given to the UDL guidelines, apps will be considered based on student engagement factor, representation of information and ability for student to respond based on their mode of communication and/or expression ability. Apps will be selected based on customization options and the ability to collect data. The data collection feature in some of the apps may be used to provide primary evidence for the portfolio requirements. 

When selecting apps, the first consideration is engagement based on my students unique learner profile. I know my students well and understand what motivates and interests them and learning can not occur without engagement. One of my students loves music and instruments so many of the apps selected for him will be on that topic. 

Another consideration when selecting apps is the ability to customize for appearance, simplicity of presentation, based on visual needs. My students require multi-sensory materials in which to learn and I look for these features in an app as well. I also look for the option of turning features on/off as needed for learner performance. Most importantly for the MCAS alt I look for data collection in an app. Not all apps have this feature but it seems as if more and more apps are adding this feature.  

Apps for children with special needs is a favorite site that I refer to frequently when selecting apps. The video tutorials demonstrating how to use and customize the apps is quite helpful. 

The widget below will showcase the apps chosen to meet the specified requirements for my leaners in each of the content areas. 




 

Reflecting on MCAS ALT training

Recently I had a professional development day. I spent the day outside of my classroom learning something new pertaining to my field of expertise in educating children with significant challenges. The challenges I speak of include sensory loss issues (deafblindness), and medical issues deeming the students fragile, resulting in global developmental delays in all areas of functioning: speech, motor (fine and gross), vision, and hearing. The training today was "2014 MCAS-Alt Updates and How to Submit a Complete Portfolio for Teachers with Recent Experience Conducting MCAS-Alt". In this training we were given a flash drive as all the resources are now digital which is a plus in my opinion. The training was organized and informative and since this is my 2nd year administering the MCAS alt to my students I did not experience the frenzy and overwhelming sensation of panic that I felt last year when I attended the training as a first time teacher completing the MCAS alt.

Instead the feelings I felt today were more of disappointment and frustration as half of the training was based on "How to ensure we (teachers) submit a completed portfolio so that "we" do not end up with the dreaded score of Incomplete".  This made me ponder the fact that this is my work, my ability to follow directions in putting together the portfolio that is truly being assessed, not the authentic work of my students. The message I took home at the end of the day is that what is important here is the way that the portfolio material is organized by me, the teacher, so that the scorers can score it properly based on the rubric that we, the teachers, have to follow.

It was recommended in the training that we seek the support of our administrators to allow for flexible time away from the classroom so that we can complete the portfolios in a manner in which we are not spending all of our nights, weekends, and school vacations putting them together. Last year I spent forty hours outside of the classroom putting together the two student portfolios and half of that time was on my "own time" - after regular hours: nights, weekends, school vacations, and snow days. I am hoping that this year since I am a bit more experienced I may be able to cut that time down but realistically I will bank on 30 hours to put the portfolios together as mandated for submission to the scoring agency in the time frame required. Tell me why is this necessary? Who is truly being assessed through this process?

After all that being said it was the end of the training when the most infuriating realization was revisited. My students , despite their developmental level, are being assessed as 4th graders because that is their chronological designation. In my professional opinion as a special education teacher my students are ready for number identification and counting activities based on 1:1 correspondence. They were ready for this last year as "third graders" as well but unfortunately the math frameworks does not allow the "Counting and Cardinality" domain to be addressed unless the student is chronologically in Pre-k or Kindergarten. This idea enraged me last year but since I was so new to the whole process I did not have the time to voice my concerns but this year I could not let this go again without questioning because in my role of special education teacher professional ethics demand "Best Practices". Research states that obtaining new knowledge is most successful when it is connected to prior knowledge and that as educators we should be building strong foundations and scaffolding skills so that our students can become successful learners. This year, in fourth grade, I am mandated to teach one targeted math skill from the Operations and Algebraic Thinking domain and one targeted skill from Number and Operations-Fractions. The standards that I must teach my students at each grade level are clearly indicated in the “2014 Educator’s Manual for MCAS-Alt”. I just don’t understand why my professional opinion on what domains my students are ready to learn does not matter. We would never expect a typical Pre-k or Kindergarten student to be assessed using the 4^th grade curriculum because they are not developmentally ready. They don’t have the foundational base or prior skill set to make solid gains so why are we expecting my students who are not developmentally at grade level to perform within the domains of that grade? This just doesn’t make sense nor it is ethical in my opinion to waste time teaching my students something that they are not ready to learn because the foundation has not properly been set for them. Are we forgetting about the “zone of proximal development”? 

The zone of proximal development (ZPD) has been defined as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p86) retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/Zone-of-Proximal-Development.html

I am not saying my students are not able to learn but simply that they are not ready to learn what is being mandated that they learn due to their unique learner needs. The learning tasks must be meaningful, functional, engaging, and lastly POSSIBLE. So why are we saying that teachers cannot teach and assess number identification, counting, and 1:1 correspondence skills past Pre-K and Kindergarten?  

I am excited that my students are finally ready to learn these skills. So why prevent them from being successful learners at their appropriate developmental level? We need to build strong foundational skills so that they will eventually be ready to be active participants in the other areas (addition, fractions, and proportions). A strong foundation has to be established in order to build these higher level skills. Addition does not make sense if number identification skills, counting, and 1:1 correspondence skills have not been reached. 

How can I expect my students to truly succeed if I cannot build these foundational skills with them when they are truly ready to learn them? As teachers we are skilled at determining our students current level of performance so why are we not able to choose the domain in which our students are ready to learn. By teaching our students at the appropriate developmental level we would be able to assess them at the “entry level” rather than at the “access level". My students are very capable of learning! Just explain to me why their learning should be based on a different standard of progression from what is expected of “typical” learners. Why not afford my students the same liberty when learning; one step at a time, built on a solid foundation, when the brain is appropriately ready to absorb the knowledge?