Читать книгу Differentiation and the Brain - David A. Sousa - Страница 8

Оглавление

CHAPTER 2

Mindset, Learning Environment, and Differentiation

If children recognize that we have seen their genius, who they really are, they will have the confidence and resilience to take risks in learning. I am convinced that many learning and social difficulties would disappear if we learned to see the genius in each child and then created a learning environment that encourages it to develop.

—Steven Levy

Hopefully, most teachers have had those days or moments of sheer professional joy when something clicks in the classroom or for a particular student and it is, at least for a time, undeniable that teaching can possess and be possessed by magic. No doubt most teachers have also had their share of moments during which the mountain that is teaching seems too high to climb. Both of these are outlier moments—the former leading us to conclude that all our students are brilliant, and the latter, that they are all beyond our reach.

In less manic or depressive moments, our attitudes (which evolve unconsciously and over time) shape our reactions to students. Some of us, for instance, are drawn to students who are quiet and compliant, while others gravitate to students who are full of surprises and challenges. Some of us may work more easily with boys, while others find it easier to work with girls. Sometimes teachers have difficulty seeing the world through the eyes of students who have economic backgrounds or cultures that differ markedly from their own. These sorts of preferences or limitations can certainly bear on teaching effectiveness. The more aware we are of such feelings, the more likely we are to deal with them in productive ways. Studies show the more positive feelings teachers have about their students and their own competence, the higher the level of student achievement (Zee & Koomen, 2016). If our attitudes, beliefs, or mindsets about teaching, learning, and our students go unexamined, the consequences can be pernicious for some or many of the young people we teach.

A Case in Point

Carlos feels invisible in class. Ms. Atcheson is polite to him, but she evidently does not expect much from him in the way of grades and achievement. When he fails to do his homework, she reminds him it will hurt his grade, but she does not seem surprised the assignment is missing. She never calls on him in class discussions, and most of the work she assigns him looks like baby work to him. Carlos has never been a good student, so her response to him is familiar. He is just as happy staying in the background.

Liza is another story. Clearly, Ms. Atcheson thinks she is smart. Ms. Atcheson often comments to the class on her work and calls on her and three or four other students more than everyone else put together. The one time Liza did not have her homework, Ms. Atcheson seemed stunned and told Liza she was disappointed. Liza has mixed feelings about the class. On the one hand, it’s good to know the teacher likes you and thinks you are smart. On the other hand, Liza feels a little dishonest. She sees the students around her working hard and nearly always getting lower grades than she does. It does not take much for her to make As. That doesn’t seem quite right.

What Are Mindsets?

Mindsets are the assumptions, expectations, and beliefs that guide our behavior and our interactions with others. These mindsets start forming at an early age. As we grow and interact with our parents, our friends, and elements of our culture, we store summaries of those interactions in our brain. Our brain’s frontal lobe (where cognitive processing is carried out) reviews these summaries regularly and coordinates with the emotional (limbic) areas to determine how we should respond to similar interactions in the future. Over time, these summaries get stored in cerebral networks. New experiences strengthen and expand these networks. Eventually, the networks become so ingrained that we react almost reflexively when similar situations arise. For example, when we spot a dear friend, neural circuits fire in the emotional and motor areas of the brain, causing us to spontaneously smile, extend our arms, and show warmth when we meet. On the other hand, different circuits might fire in the presence of a demanding boss, causing us to stiffen and display deference.

We develop mindsets about many things. To name a few, we have mindsets about religion, politics, our jobs, our futures, each of our family members, and anybody we interact with regularly. Because adult mindsets are so well established in neural networks, they are difficult to change. For example, media coverage of news events can lead to stereotyping of people of color or women. Constantly viewing these stereotypes makes them difficult to overcome. Moreover, neuroscience research finds the neural networking of mindsets is very complex (Mitchell, Banaji, & Macrae, 2005). It may take much more neural effort to change one part of a mindset network (such as about a particular content area) than to change the entire network (Diamond, 2009; Lou & Noels, 2016). These findings would imply that high motivation and considerable persistence are needed to change an adult mindset, but it can be done.

Teachers have mindsets about their jobs, colleagues, and students. They may not even be aware of some of the assumptions and beliefs they hold in their mindsets, yet these attitudes can still affect their behavior and be communicated to others. Have you ever discussed a student’s work and behavior with another teacher who had the same student and felt like you were talking about two different people? Why did that happen? Most likely, you and the other teacher were looking at this student with very different mindsets. Picture a student who is constantly raising questions during a lesson. One teacher may get angry at this student without realizing the anger stems from the assumption that the student’s persistence is an attempt to derail the lesson. In contrast, another teacher may interpret the student’s questions as an honest effort to thoroughly understand the content. The teachers’ mindsets result in different interpretations of the student’s behavior and, consequently, in different teacher responses.

Mindsets are the assumptions, expectations, and beliefs that guide our behavior and our interactions with others.

The Effective Teacher’s Mindset

Robert Brooks and Sam Goldstein (2008) suggest effective teachers have a characteristic mindset that guides their behavior throughout the teaching-learning processes. The following discussion shows how many of the assumptions and beliefs of an effective teacher’s mindset are particularly pertinent to the learning environment in differentiated classrooms.

Teachers Have a Lifelong Impact

Those of us who have taught realize we can influence our students’ lives for years to come. The research literature on child resilience highlights the extent of our impact. It shows several factors enable children of misfortune to beat the heavy odds against them. One factor is the presence in their lives of a charismatic adult—a person they can identify with and gather strength from. In a surprising number of cases, that person turns out to be a teacher (Sanders, Munford, & Liebenberg, 2016). Thus, effective teachers recognize they are in a unique position to be charismatic adults in students’ lives.

David remembers working years ago with a high school sophomore who wanted to go to college but had little confidence in his academic abilities. Continuing encouragement and extra help during the student’s junior and senior years helped. Having gained self-confidence, the student went on to graduate from the U.S. Air Force Academy. While flying combat missions over Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm, the student—now an air force major—sent David a note expressing thanks for encouraging him during his difficult days in high school.

Even small gestures—such as giving a warm greeting, sending a note of encouragement, taking a few minutes to meet alone with a student, and showing an appreciation of and respect for different learning needs in a differentiated classroom—can have a lifelong impact.

The Classroom Must Feel Safe and Secure

The foundation for successful learning and a safe, secure classroom is the relationship teachers develop with their students. Why is this so significant? To answer this question, we need to briefly explain how the brain handles incoming information. Figure 2.1 illustrates the hierarchy of response to sensory input. It is important to understand that any input of higher priority diminishes the processing of lower-priority data.

Figure 2.1: The hierarchy of response to sensory input.

The brain’s main job is to help its owner survive. Thus, data interpreted as posing a threat to the survival of the individual, such as a burning odor, a snarling dog, or someone threatening bodily injury, are processed immediately. When the stimulus is received, a rush of adrenaline is sent throughout the brain. This reflexive response shuts down all unnecessary activity and directs the brain’s attention to the source of the stimulus.

Emotional data also take high priority. When an individual responds emotionally to a situation, the limbic system takes command and suspends complex cognitive processes. We have all had experiences when anger, fear of the unknown, or joy quickly overcame our rational thoughts. Under certain conditions, emotions can enhance memory by causing the release of hormones that signal brain regions to strengthen memory. In other words, strong emotions can simultaneously shut down conscious processing during an event and enhance our memory of it. Emotion is a powerful and misunderstood force in learning and memory.

The brain’s reaction to both survival stimuli and powerful emotions is reflexive; that is, it occurs instinctively and without prior planning. If neither threats to survival nor strong emotions are present, the brain can turn its attention to processing factual information and concepts. This reflective process allows learning to take place by making connections to previous experiences and building cognitive networks.

Another way of stating the hierarchy illustrated in figure 2.1 is before students will turn their attention to cognitive learning (the curriculum), they must feel physically safe and emotionally secure.

Students must feel physically safe and emotionally secure before they can focus on the curriculum

All Students Want to Succeed

The belief that students want to succeed relates to the growth mindset we discuss later in this chapter. The human brain does not deal well with failure. If a student is not learning, the teacher must determine how to modify his or her teaching style and instructional material to meet the student’s needs. If a teacher believes certain students are inherently lazy or unmotivated, then that negative mindset leads the teacher to respond to these students with annoyance. This response sets the stage for a negative learning environment and alters the students’ emotional state.

Figure 2.2 (page 24) illustrates how positive and negative learning environments affect body chemistry, thereby altering the emotions and learning of those in the classroom. In positive learning climates, chemicals called endorphins are running through the bloodstream. These are the body’s natural painkillers and mood elevators. They produce a sense of euphoria, so an individual feels good about being in the situation. Endorphins also raise the pain threshold, so minor aches are no longer bothersome. Most important, they stimulate the frontal lobe to remember the situation and whatever it is processing at the moment—most likely the learning objective.

However, in a negative learning environment, very different biochemical reactions are at work. Negative climates create stress, which elevates the concentration of the hormone cortisol in the bloodstream. This chemical is a powerful steroid that raises an individual’s anxiety level. It also prompts the frontal lobe to stop processing low-priority information, such as the learning objective, in order to focus on the cause of the stress and decide how to reduce or remove it. Thus, the frontal lobe remembers the situation, but the learning objective has already dropped out of the memory systems.

Figure 2.2: The impact of the learning environment on body chemistry.

Teachers who believe all students come to school desiring to learn will figure out different ways to reach and teach uninterested or frustrated students. This positive mindset has a profound impact on the ways teachers respond in the classroom, especially to struggling students. When students lose faith in their ability to learn, they often turn to counterproductive ways of coping, such as misbehaving or withdrawing. This situation is less likely to occur in a differentiated classroom, where students of varying abilities have a better chance of success and teachers’ negative assumptions are far less apt to prevail.

Teachers Must Meet the Social-Emotional Needs of Students

Attending to students’ social-emotional needs is not a digression that draws time from teaching academic subjects, but rather an important part of classroom practice. Students are not just learning the curriculum; they are learning about themselves, how they interact with their peers, and how they choose their friends. They are also learning to deal with their emotions, such as how they react to failure and respond to the opposite sex.

In the mid-2000s, a field of study emerged called social cognitive neuroscience. Brain-imaging technology allows researchers in this field to answer a long-standing question: Are the cerebral mechanisms and neural networks involved in social stimuli processing (for example, forming relationships, comparing others to oneself, or interpreting the behavior of others) different from those involved in the processing of nonsocial stimuli (for example, dealing with hunger and sleep)? Apparently, the answer is yes. Studies indicate specific brain regions activate when subjects face making social decisions and judgments as part of a performance task (Kilford, Garrett, & Blakemore, 2016; Mitchell et al., 2005; Olson, Plotzker, & Ezzyat, 2007).

One surprising finding is the discovery of spindle-shaped neurons in the front part of the brain. These neurons are larger and have fewer branches than the neurons typically found in brain tissue. Called von Economo neurons (named for the man to first describe them), they are found only in human beings, great apes, and a few other distinctly gregarious animals. Researchers note the von Economo neurons are found in similar places in the brains of these animals and speculate they play a major role in generating social emotions and monitoring social interactions (Chen, 2009). Figure 2.3 shows the location of the two sites where von Economo neurons are found in humans, the anterior cingulate cortex and frontal insula (Chen, 2009).

The neural networks that process social stimuli are different from those that process nonsocial stimuli.

Source: Adapted from Chen, 2009.

Figure 2.3: Two locations of von Economo neurons in the brain.

Studies of people with a degenerative disease called frontotemporal dementia provide additional evidence of the von Economo neurons’ association with social interactions. These patients lose their social graces, show no empathy, and turn irresponsible, erratic, and insensitive. In one study, brain imaging reveals the dementia targets the neurons in the anterior cingulate cortex and the frontal insula (Brambati et al., 2007).

Brain regions and neurons for processing social interactions suggest how important social relationships are to human development and behavior. In the brain of children and adolescents, the frontal lobe is not mature enough to exert complete control over social-emotional processing. As a result, social-emotional needs are a high priority with many students (Sousa, 2009a). Of course, a high percentage of the social interactions in schools occur between teachers and students. During a school day, many students spend more time with all their teachers than with any of their parents, siblings, or peers. This reality alone makes it crucial for the student and the teacher to perceive, assess, and respond to each other’s behavior accurately and adequately. Effective teachers recognize these needs and find ways to address them while still managing to present the curriculum objectives. However, face-to-face interaction between students and teachers is rapidly giving way to face-to-device interaction as the use of technology expands in the classroom. What are the consequences of this shift in social communications?

Technology Is Affecting Social Skills

Most students are growing up with technology. It is an integral part of their lifestyle. Technology, of course, can be an excellent tool for helping students learn. A Common Sense Media (2015) survey finds that preteens spend an average of nearly six hours a day using media, while teenagers average more than nine hours a day. These times do not include technology use in the classroom. As we mention in chapter 1, this extensive use of technology is rewiring students’ brains because of neural plasticity—the brain’s ability to reconfigure cerebral networks because of input from its environment.

One of the areas where technology is having a significant impact on brain development involves social skills. Our genetic code is programmed to promote social interaction. However, the large amount of time preteens and teenagers are spending with their digital devices means they are spending less time interacting with real people in face-to-face conversation. They are not learning about the importance of nonverbal cues (such as body language, eye contact, emotional displays, and facial changes) during conversation, and failure to understand these cues can lead to misinterpretations of the speaker’s message. Device-centered communications can also provoke a lack of discretion, whereby individuals write comments that would get them in serious trouble if said in person. Someone can send an unfavorable and potentially damaging comment to millions of people in just seconds.

Teachers can be a valuable resource in helping students understand the value of in-person social interactions, and talking with a teacher and peers about new learning can help establish sense and meaning. Class discussions could touch on the perils of not thoroughly thinking through comments people make on social media and the danger of not recognizing the value of having empathy for fellow students.

Empathy Is Very Important

For teacher-student relationships to be effective, teachers must be empathetic and attempt to perceive the world through their students’ eyes. Students who have caring relationships with their teachers perform better academically than students who do not. Further, empathy can potentially foster openness, attentiveness, and positive relationships, especially in culturally diverse classrooms. Being open and flexible helps teachers adjust to varying contexts and improves their ability to differentiate instruction and curriculum to fit their students’ needs (Carter, 2015; Gay, 2010; McAllister & Irvine, 2002).

Empathetic teachers ask themselves if they would want someone to say or do to them what they have just said or done to a student, colleague, or parent. For instance, teachers sometimes try to motivate underperforming students by urging them to “try harder.” Although the remark may be well intentioned, the teacher is assuming the students are unwilling to expend the time and energy necessary to succeed. Consequently, students frequently construe this comment to be accusatory and judgmental. When students feel accused, they are less apt to be cooperative. The teacher’s comment fails to lead to the desired results, which, in turn, may further reinforce the teacher’s belief that the students are unmotivated.

Students Should Feel a Sense of Ownership of Their Education

Teachers who believe students should feel ownership of their education and success welcome frequent student input. Whenever students feel their voice is being heard, they tend to work cooperatively with teachers and are more motivated to meet their academic challenges (Broom, 2015; Carroll et al., 2009; McQuillan, 2005). Further, having a voice reinforces their feelings of personal agency and responsibility, which are essential ingredients of a positive school climate. One good way to give students a sense of ownership is to ask them to consider what rules are needed in the classroom for all students to feel comfortable and learn best.

Teachers Should Identify and Reinforce Each Student’s Areas of Competence

Too often we focus on our students’ problems and vulnerabilities and afford little time to reinforcing their strengths and competencies. One obvious strategy for helping students feel competent is to teach them in the ways they learn best. Because each student has different learning needs and strengths, teachers should familiarize themselves with such topics as multiple intelligences, learning-style characteristics, and gender- and culture-influenced learning preferences. We discuss each of these topics in detail and consider their implications for differentiating instruction in chapter 7 (page 149).

Another strategy for enhancing a sense of competence is to offer students opportunities to help others. For example, older students with learning problems could read to younger students, or students of varying abilities could work together as a team, bringing their own unique strengths to different projects. Students experience more positive feelings toward school and are more motivated to learn if encouraged to contribute to the school environment.

Teachers Should Address Fears of Failure and Humiliation

As we mention previously, fear is an intense emotional response that shuts down higher cognitive processes so the brain can focus on the source of the fear and decide how to deal with it. Deciding how to manage fear is the responsibility of the brain’s frontal lobe. In children and adolescents, the frontal lobe is not fully developed, so it has limited ability to interpret and dampen the fear response.

One of the greatest obstacles to learning is the fear of making mistakes. Because many students equate making mistakes with feeling humiliated, they will avoid learning tasks that appear too challenging. Effective teachers know that to prevent this situation, it is best to openly address these fears with students. One technique for lessening students’ fear of failure is for teachers to share stories from their own school days about being afraid of or actually making mistakes, such as failing a test. Their openness may invite students to share some of their thoughts and feelings about making mistakes. Teachers can ask what they can do and what the students can do as a class to minimize the fear of failure.

By sharing their own experiences of making mistakes, teachers can help lower students’ fear of failure.

Discipline Is a Teaching Process

Discipline is a process for teaching acceptable behaviors rather than a process of intimidation and humiliation. Classes with well-planned, engaging lessons rarely have discipline problems because students feel successful while taking part in meaningful learning experiences. Their cerebral reward circuits activate and avoid distracting behaviors. When a behavior problem does arise, teachers who believe discipline is a way of teaching remind the student of the appropriate behavior and attempt later to determine the cause of the misbehavior. The emphasis is always on what the student did and not on who the student is, and on understanding and addressing the reasons for the misbehavior rather than on punishing it.

In these classrooms, teachers start every day with the expectation that students will behave appropriately. They have a few rules all students clearly understand. They enforce the rules consistently, act fairly, deal with discipline problems immediately and with the least amount of interruption, avoid confrontations in front of students, and know how to use humor (not sarcasm) to defuse tense situations. See chapter 8 (page 179) for specific suggestions on leading and managing a differentiated classroom.

Fixed and Growth Mindsets

Carol Dweck (2006) has spent much of her career examining people’s mindsets about learning—about what it means to be smart and how success happens. Her work is profoundly important for educators, reminding us how our preconceptions shape our beliefs and actions—as well as the beliefs and actions of the students we teach. These ideas are particularly significant for the teaching philosophy of differentiation. Dweck (2006) finds through decades of research that at a young age, we develop either a fixed or a growth mindset about the origins of ability and success. Those who develop a fixed mindset accept the premise that we are born smart or not smart—able or not able—in a particular domain. In this line of thinking, environments can contribute to our smart quotient or prospects for success, but the genetic predisposition to be a good mathematician or a poor one, a great soccer player or a mediocre one, is so strong that it will win the day in determining the likelihood that an individual will do well in a given pursuit.

By contrast, people who develop a growth mindset operate from a radically different perspective on ability and success. Growth-mindset individuals believe while genetics might sketch out a starting point in our development, it is really one’s own determination and persistence—in combination with persistent and determined support—that predict success. Most likely, few teachers are aware of fixed- and growth-mindset options or have had occasion to unpack and examine their own perspectives on student ability and success. Nonetheless, where we stand shapes our practice and our students. Certainly, mindset frames teacher success with differentiation.

Mindset, Teaching, and Learning

Teachers with fixed mindsets, consciously or unconsciously, accept the premise that some students will learn and some will not, largely because of their genetics and home environments. Such teachers set out to determine who is smart or capable and who is not. From their viewpoint, it seems to make good sense to separate students by their perceived ability and teach them accordingly. Teachers with a fixed mindset often have groups in the classroom, making it evident to virtually everyone whom they perceive to be smart and whom they perceive to be not smart. Sometimes they opt to form whole classes of smart students and corresponding classes of not-smart students. In either case, they then accept the logic of accelerating the smart students and remediating the others. They teach some students at what they perceive to be high levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (1956; for example, knowledge and comprehension levels) and others at low levels (for example, application, analysis, synthesis, or evaluation), pleased to have a framework that seems well suited to the various locations of students on the ability spectrum. A fixed mindset also disposes these teachers to like labels that name which problems hinder some students and which advantages propel others.

By contrast, teachers with growth mindsets begin with the premise that most students can learn most things if they exert the effort necessary. They also accept the related premise that the teacher’s role is to elicit the effort and join with the student in doing whatever it takes to succeed. They teach up—that is, they design and create work to stretch a student, and then partner with the student to ensure he or she has the support and scaffolding necessary to master what initially seems out of reach. Teachers with growth mindsets want to see students in a variety of classroom groupings—students functioning in an array of contexts that yield insight about what works for them. These teachers have little use for labels but rather seek understanding of what to do tomorrow to help students move to the next step in learning. They neither accept excuses about why a student can’t learn or hasn’t completed work nor buy into the notion that advanced learners should receive high grades for work that was too easy for them. They are proponents of a staunch work ethic for everyone—themselves included.

Teachers, of course, signal students with their conclusions about the likelihood of their success. It is not surprising to hear students who know they are seen as not smart come to see themselves as not smart, and students who know they are seen as smart come to see themselves that way as well. Of greater significance, however, is that the not-smart students attribute their lack of success to factors beyond their control, making statements such as, “Nobody in my family is good at mathematics” or “I just don’t have any talent as a singer.” Often, students who hold such beliefs give up in the face of difficulty because they believe the ability to do the work is simply not in them.

Ironically, when teachers put a premium on being smart rather than on working hard, highly able students suffer as well. They conclude that smartness is something they are born with. When they encounter work they cannot easily accomplish, it seems to indicate that they are not smart after all because smart people do not have to work hard, and this task requires serious work. Often, then, such students will reject the challenge. In fact, bright students with a fixed mindset often select easier tasks in a class, opt to take easier classes, reject feedback on their work as negative judgment, and work for grades rather than for the sake of learning because it is the grade that signals success and smartness.

In contrast, students working with teachers who insist everyone can succeed if he or she works hard enough (and the effort, not genetics, is worthy of celebration) come to believe they can have an impact on their own success. They develop a sense of self-efficacy as learners and are more likely than their fixed-mindset peers to learn for the sake of learning, persist in the face of difficulty, and see feedback as a mechanism for continued improvement. Students who have previously neither seen themselves as capable and successful nor been seen that way begin to work harder, thus contributing to their own success and a more efficacious self-image (Dweck, 2006). Students who have always seen themselves as smart, and, therefore, as people who should not have to work hard, begin to understand the reality that growth and comfort cannot coexist and the nearly universal hallmark of great contributors to society is that they worked harder than their peers.

Figure 2.4 describes the learning environments that result from different combinations of student and teacher mindsets. Clearly, developing a growth mindset is important for both teacher and student success and essential for an effectively differentiated classroom.

Figure 2.4: Possible combinations of fixed and growth mindsets.

Fixed and Growth Mindsets and Differentiation

There is ample evidence that people can and do change their mindsets (Dweck, 2006). Teachers in differentiated classrooms need to be particularly cognizant of their beliefs about where ability comes from and what it means to be smart. At the very least, they should strive to develop a growth mindset. This book’s model of differentiation advocates a teaching approach difficult to implement effectively with a fixed mindset. Some principles of the model follow. Think about how a teacher with a fixed mindset versus one with a growth mindset would respond to the implementation of each of these principles.

• Student openness to the risk of learning begins when a teacher connects with each student and indicates a belief in that student’s value and potential.

• The teacher builds community, beginning with modeling his or her respect for the possibilities of each class member.

• Each student must have consistent responsibilities for the successful operation of the class.

• Students learn to work with increasing independence and self-awareness as learners.

• Students are partners in the belief that every student in the class can and will succeed with the most essential content.

• Fairness is making sure all students get the support they need to succeed.

• Success is, at least in part, determined by student growth, which means students compete against themselves rather than against one another.

• The teacher teaches up—that is, he or she establishes high expectations and differentiates to support all students in achieving high-level goals.

• The teacher uses flexible grouping practices to place each student in various contexts so students see themselves in different settings and have a wide range of opportunities to succeed.

• All students work with respectful tasks—that is, tasks are differentiated in response to individual students’ needs, but all tasks are equally interesting, appealing, important, and dependent on high levels of reasoning.

A teacher with a growth mindset is well positioned to say to students, through actions and words, “I’m so glad you’re here. I’m excited to learn about each one of you because I’m convinced all of you can succeed at a higher level than you had ever thought possible. My job is to work with you to establish a classroom that makes it possible for everyone to succeed. I’m going to ask a great deal of you and also of myself as we work together, because it is your effort and my effort on your behalf that will result in your success. I need your insights about yourself, about one another, and about our class. We will be stronger for the presence of each of you in our classroom.” A teacher with a fixed mindset will find such thoughts much less natural and intuitive.

Likewise, students who have a teacher with a growth mindset will receive consistent signals as well as direct guidance and purposeful actions that will lead them to see the connections between their effort and success at a high level. However, students of a teacher with a fixed mindset will probably find the signals and connections far less clear.

Exercise 2.1 (page 39) offers some questions to help teachers think about their own mindsets and the implications of their responses for differentiation. As the chapter continues, it will be helpful to think about links between teacher mindset and the kind of learning environment that can maximize each learner’s growth and success in an inevitably academically diverse classroom.

Classroom Environments and Differentiation

Learning environments are largely invisible yet permeate everything happening in a classroom. Perhaps because of their invisibility, we tend not to talk about learning environments very much in faculty meetings, staff development sessions, or professional conversations. These missed opportunities diminish teachers’ awareness of this critical aspect of schooling and their intentionality in developing environments that actively invite learning.

We see examples all around of how environment shapes our responses to events. Most of us have been to a restaurant where the surroundings are appealing, staff members are welcoming, waiters are attentive to our particular tastes, and the food is an art form. Most of us have also been to a different restaurant where the food is equally good, but those who interact with us are too attentive or not attentive enough, where the surroundings are overdone or drab and greasy, where someone is arguing loudly at the next table, where the service takes far too long, or where we feel obliged to swallow dinner whole so the people waiting nearby can be seated. The same extraordinary food in the latter settings cannot make up for the environmental missteps, and we are unlikely to leave those settings with a desire to invest our resources there again.

Similarly, the medical profession knows a great deal about the contributions of positive environments to healing. These days when one walks into a hospital lobby or waiting area, it looks more like a hotel than like the austere hospitals of a generation ago. Even hospital rooms are often painted in pastels, have comfortable chairs for guests, and allow family to stay overnight. Medical personnel now readily share information with patients and solicit their help in decision making. The results are a lessening of patient apprehension and better overall patient attitudes and outcomes.

Classroom environments are no less critical to outcomes for students, who typically lack power and autonomy in school settings. In many ways, classroom environments are harbingers of cognitive and academic outcomes. Just as their environments affect adults, classroom environments encourage or discourage, energize or deflate, and invite or alienate students. Positive learning environments prepare students for the difficult task of learning. They open up students to the possibilities of what lies ahead. In that way, learning environments have profound implications for learners both affectively and cognitively. John Hattie (2012) calls these highly positive environments and catalysts for learning invitational environments. He notes they become invitational as teachers demonstrate respect for each student, trust each student to work collaboratively and effectively, have optimism each student has the capacity to learn what is taught, and develop intentionality that results in each step of a lesson inviting each student to learn. Learning (and the classroom in which it takes place) also becomes more invitational when a teacher works consistently to establish meaningful and deepening connections with each student. This approach also includes helping students establish trust among each other so there are clear and evident learning partnerships.

Learning environments have profound implications for learners both affectively and cognitively.

Learning Environments, Student Affect, and Differentiation

Many readers may recall that Abraham H. Maslow (1943) proposes human beings have a hierarchy of needs consisting of five levels. Satisfying needs at the more fundamental levels must happen before addressing needs at the higher levels. In the hierarchical progression, physiological or biological requirements such as food, shelter, and sleep are at the first level. Once addressed, the need for safety and security takes center stage at the second level. The third level is the need for belonging, affection, and love, while esteem and respect (which stem from achievement) are at the fourth level. Only when all these levels are met can a person strive to attend to the fifth, and highest, level of need—becoming self-actualized, which is what one is meant to be (Maslow, 1943).

The implications of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy for learning are evident, and research further supports how the brain prioritizes incoming information (see figure 2.1, page 22). If young people come to school hungry or sleepy or both, they need a teacher and the classroom environment to address those fundamental needs. When those basic survival needs are adequately addressed, students then turn their attention to the need for safety and security.

Feeling safe certainly includes a sense that the school and classroom are protected from intruders, violence, and other forces that, regrettably, are very real in the world of contemporary students. Protection from those sorts of violations is a school-level responsibility. In the classroom, maintaining safety and security includes having structures such as class rules and routines that lend predictability to the day. It extends to the assurance that students do not make fun of, belittle, or bully one another. Many students at all grade levels come to school each day feeling vulnerable to peers, society, and even their families. If the learning environment is crafted to address issues of safety and security, the classroom becomes an oasis of order in an otherwise unreliable world. If the learning environment feels unsafe and insecure, an intangible but very real barrier stands between the student and academic growth. Every student—not just the ones we might identify as vulnerable—needs an abiding sense that the classroom has protective rules of the road universally followed. Such assurance and knowledge provide stability that allows attention to the next higher level of need.

With adequate attention to safety and security, students seek belonging, affection, and love. Shaped by a growth mindset, the teacher’s positive regard for each student sends initial signals that the classroom has a place for everyone—that everyone is worthy of respect. A teacher attuned to students’ needs helps the students work collaboratively, celebrate one another’s successes, support one another’s needs, and create positive memories as the year progresses. In this way, the classroom becomes a community.

Clearly, we do a disservice to teachers (and their students) when we imply their job is simply to convey content. If the learning environment confounds student needs at any level of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy below achievement, esteem, and respect, it creates barriers to students’ academic success. This book’s model of brain-friendly differentiation counsels teachers that virtually all students enter their classrooms seeking affirmation, contribution, purpose, challenge, and power. Further, the model advises that the most effective teachers respond to those student needs with invitation, investment, opportunity, persistence, and reflection (Tomlinson, 2003, 2017). The model reflects the following beliefs.

• Teaching and learning are rooted in a teacher’s response to a learner’s fundamental needs.

• Students in a given classroom will have common affective needs shared by all human beings.

• Students in a given classroom will inevitably bring varied experiences that have shaped their emotional development and will require personalized affective attention to help them grow from their current points of development.

• Attending to students’ affective needs is both a precursor to and an integral part of effective teaching.

In other words, learning environments that support academic success for each student proactively address both affective and cognitive needs, and teachers who develop such environments understand the interface between affective and cognitive growth. Exercise 2.2 (page 41) offers some questions to help teachers think about the relationship between student affect, learning environment, and differentiation, and reflect on ways to refine learning environments to benefit student growth.

Differentiation advises teachers to respond to student needs with invitation, investment, opportunity, persistence, and reflection.

Learning Environments, Student Cognition, and Differentiation

There was a time long ago when prevailing wisdom suggested every child was born as a blank slate—a tabula rasa. As adults wrote on those slates, so the theory went, students would learn what they needed to know. Although that theory has long been discredited, classrooms often still function as though the teacher’s job is to tell students what they need to know, and the students’ job is to absorb what they hear. Creating a learning environment to support that theory of learning is relatively simple. All that is needed is a room with rows of desks, a teacher who is prepared to tell students what they need to know, and students who learn to sit in the rows of desks and listen quietly to what the teacher has to say.

If psychologists had not already discredited that approach to teaching and learning, simply observing classrooms would relieve any sentiment that the tell-and-absorb approach works. Students in such a setting may (or may not) sit and listen, but they typically do not retain, recall, or transfer what they hear. Neither do they generally become engaged with learning. What we now know about how students learn requires quite a different and more complex learning environment.

Brain-imaging studies provide increasing evidence that stimulating learning environments may be responsible for more rapid and robust neuron development in children and adolescents. Although genetics certainly play a role in brain growth, many neuroscientists suspect environmental influences probably play an even greater role (Plomin, Shakeshaft, McMillan, & Trzaskowski, 2014; Rao et al., 2010; Shaw et al., 2006). Maintaining a rich learning environment, of course, should be the goal of all schools, but the research studies cited earlier imply school experiences for children and adolescents may have a significant impact on an individual’s brain development and eventual level of intelligence. That bears repeating—what happens in classrooms may actually raise or lower a student’s IQ!

Exercise 2.3 (page 45) invites teachers and administrators to reflect on a summary of what we know about learners, the nature of their learning, and the kind of environment necessary to support each student’s ability to learn (National Research Council, 2000). Among the qualities of learning environments conducive to developing student cognition, we know three are particularly important.

A stimulating learning environment may have a significant impact on an individual’s brain development and eventual level of intelligence.

1. Our best knowledge and understanding of the nature of the learning process points to learner-centered classroom environments. That is, teachers teach better when they systematically study their students to increase their understanding of both the age group as a whole and the individuals within that age group. This understanding enables them to focus the content on student needs. Texts, as well as thoughtfully developed content outlines and pacing guides, can be helpful in determining what teachers should emphasize and how much time they should allot to various curriculum aspects. Scripted texts may be carefully planned to cover content, but they are poorly suited to addressing the varied learning needs of the students who use them. These common tools should never drive the teaching and learning process.

2. Our best knowledge of how people learn leads to the conclusion that learning environments must be flexible in order to maximize students’ cognitive development. That is, teachers must be prepared to use time, space, furniture, materials, groupings, strategies, and other classroom elements in multiple ways to address students’ multiple developmental trajectories. To assume all students in a particular class will benefit from trying to learn the same thing in the same way over the same time period and with the same support systems rejects what we know about student variance in aptitudes, interests, and motivation.

3. Our best knowledge of how people learn indicates rich and stimulating environments serve as catalysts for students’ cognitive growth. That is particularly true today, as students are digital natives accustomed to engaging with their learning. Thus, the learning environment provides materials, models, and human interactions that tap into and feed students’ natural interests, learning preferences, curiosity, and desire for successful autonomy. Because students have different interests, inclinations, strengths, weaknesses, and approaches to learning, instructional resources will necessarily have to be both varied and matched to student needs. Remember, the brain is a strong pattern seeker, continually looking for ways to weave new and past learning into a conceptual pattern that makes sense and has meaning. Rich and stimulating environments are the places where such connections, pattern development, and retention of learning best occur.

Classroom environments with these three qualities are mindfully designed to promote student responsibility, self-awareness as a learner, and learning for the satisfaction of learning. They are not about creating cute bulletin boards or protective cocoons but rather about building a context that capitalizes on the human inclination to learn to achieve one’s potential and contribute to the time and place in which one lives. Exercise 2.4 (page 47) offers some questions to help teachers think about the relationship between student cognitive needs, learning environment, and differentiation, and reflect on ways to refine learning environments to benefit student development.

Differentiated classroom environments are designed to promote student responsibility, self-awareness as a learner, and learning for the satisfaction of learning.

As you read about the components of differentiation and the ways brain research supports and amplifies those components, it is helpful to continue thinking about the impact of a teacher’s mindset and the learning environment on each component. No sharp lines exist between the four classroom elements; they are both overlapping and interdependent. Strengthening any one of them makes the others more robust, while failure to attend to any of them results in some deterioration of the others.

A Better Scenario

Ms. Atcheson tells her students on the first day of class the two most important things being a teacher has taught her are every student in her class can be a successful student, and it is her job to make sure that happens.

“You all come to class with different strengths and different experiences,” she tells them, “so you won’t learn everything in the same way or at the same time. But each one of you will learn more than you ever thought you could in this class.”

She tells the students the one thing she will insist on is they come to class every day ready to work as hard as they possibly can. “I promise you I’ll come every day to work with you as hard as I can.”

“Each day,” she says to them, “I’m going to ask each of you to take your next step toward success. It won’t necessarily be the same step as the person next to you, but it will be what you need to do in order to grow as a learner that day.”

Carlos is suspicious. He has, after all, never been a good student. Liza is worried. She is not sure she knows how to work hard. Both students find the class to be very challenging. Both students hit a wall from time to time, but Ms. Atcheson always makes sure they have the support to get up and try again. At the end of the year, Carlos says it is the first time he has ever felt smart in school. Liza says this is the first class she has ever really earned the good grade she made.

Exercise 2.1

Questions for Teachers About Mindset, Learning Environment, and Differentiation

Respond to the following questions. After you finish, review your responses and reflect on how your mindset affects your classroom decisions. Building administrators can use this activity at a faculty meeting to discuss how teacher mindset can affect students’ progress in the school. Both groups should consider ways the school environment and procedures generally reflect a fixed or growth mindset in teachers and students, and the implications of their conclusions. Over time, it is important to carefully examine ways both the school and its classrooms can increasingly reflect a growth mindset.

1. How comfortable are you with classes that group students by perceived ability?

2. What evidence in your teaching shows students who were perceived as not smart that they can be quite successful academically as a result of their effort and a teacher’s partnership?

3. When a student does poorly in class, do you ever attribute it to the student’s home or background?

4. In what ways do you demonstrate to students that they are in charge of their academic success—that their effort is the key to their success?

5. How often do you make comments emphasizing being smart versus working hard?

6. In what ways do you show students that discoveries and insights almost inevitably stem from failures rather than from successes?

7. To what degree do you see a student’s Ds and Fs as inevitable?

8. To what degree do you see a student’s straight As as an indicator that the student may not be experiencing appropriate challenge—may not be growing?

9. How do you share your own failures and persistence with students to ensure they see you as an adult who believes continued effort will win the day?

10. In what ways do you monitor students’ mindsets and help them set goals and monitor progress to ensure each will develop a growth mindset about learning and success?

Possible Changes to Consider

Exercise 2.2

Questions for Teachers About Student Affective Needs, Learning Environment, and Differentiation

Respond to the following questions. After you finish, review your responses and reflect on whether you should consider making any changes to your instructional approach to meet the affective needs of your students. Building administrators can use this activity at a faculty meeting to discuss the school’s progress toward the goal of meeting students’ affective needs.

Physiological Needs

1. Are you alert to needs such as hunger and sleep deprivation?

2. Do you address those needs for the short term, when appropriate?

3. Do you work with others to address those needs for the longer term?

Need for Safety and Security

4. Are you attuned to student behaviors that might indicate a lack of safety and security at home? Are you prepared to seek competent assistance in working with students who exhibit such behaviors?

5. Do you persistently model respect for each student in all your actions and comments?

6. Is it clear that you value diversity in the classroom?

7. Is the classroom a tease-free, bully-free, disrespect-free zone?

8. Are there clear classroom rules that emphasize what students should do rather than what they shouldn’t do?

9. Is humor always positive—that is, no sarcasm?

10. Are students called on equitably?

Need for Belonging, Respect, and Affection

11. Do you greet and otherwise connect with each student every day?

12. Do students contribute to developing classroom rules and routines?

13. Do you take time to briefly share your experiences?

14. Do you give students time to share their experiences?

15. Do students listen to you and to one another, and do you listen to students?

16. Do students have regular opportunities to collaborate in the classroom?

17. Do you help students learn how to collaborate effectively?

18. Does each student feel he or she has peers who are partners in learning who support one another’s success?

19. Are problems dealt with respectfully and seen as opportunities to learn and grow?

20. Is everyone expected to contribute to the classroom and effectively supported in doing so?

21. Do you take time to seek the students’ input on how class is working for them individually and as a group?

22. Do you seek varied perspectives on topics, issues, and problems?

Need for Achievement and Esteem

23. Do you acknowledge and celebrate legitimate student successes?

24. Do you report student progress and growth as well as achievement?

25. Do you emphasize competition against oneself rather than competition against one another?

Possible Changes to Consider

Exercise 2.3

Reflections on Cognitive Traits of Learners and the Environments That Support Those Traits

Teachers and administrators should consider whether the environments of their classrooms and schools support the learning traits we now know about (National Research Council, 2000). Building administrators can use this activity at a faculty meeting to discuss the school’s progress toward offering students positive learning environments.

Because we know …	Class and school environments should …
Children and young people are active learners	Support meaning making versus absorption of content
Learners construct their own meaning and learn what they come to understand	Promote active involvement in learning
Students naturally set goals, plan, and revise	Call on and continually develop goal-setting, planning, and revision skills
Each student works within a zone or bandwidth of readiness and competence	Provide for variance in student readiness
Students grow in readiness as they are supported by others in developing the new competencies they need to move ahead	Provide supportive peer and teacher partnerships focused on a particular student’s next steps in growth
Students have different learning predispositions, so they learn in different ways	Be flexible enough to emphasize students’ various strengths and work with their various weaknesses
Students of the same age learn on different timetables	Be flexible enough to address students’ varied needs for practice
Students develop multiple strategies for solving problems gradually, and with practice and guidance	Promote experimenting with solutions and provide plenty of practice time for developing, understanding, selecting, and refining solutions
Students learn best in communities	Provide many and varied opportunities for students to work collaboratively and to develop the skills and attitudes necessary to do so
Students learn best with many tools, artifacts, and materials to support their learning	Be rich in tools, materials, artifacts, and other resources

Source: National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Exercise 2.4

Questions for Teachers About Student Cognitive Needs, Learning Environment, and Differentiation

Подняться наверх