EDU5ISB Assessment 2 Part 2

Learning needs of Student A

Introduction

A thirteen-day practicum was completed in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The school is well known for
providing a safe and supportive learning environment, evident by their mentorship program and
observation of interactions between staff and students. Most subjects are taught in Malay, however
as specified by the Malaysian Government some subjects are taught in English. This includes subjects
that were taught during this practicum; general science and chemistry (Years 10-12). Teaching in
English presented additional challenges for both the staff and students, some of which are
highlighted by the following students learning profile.

This student, identified as Student A, was selected because of the compounding issues affecting
learning, although the student experiences no known intellectual issues. This presents an optimistic
situation in which the student can excel and reach the level of other students if adequate support is
provided.

Student Profile

Student A is 16 years old, female, and in Grade 11. Her favourite subjects are art and home
economics. She has low socio-economic status (SES) and Malay is her first language. She has no
evident intellectual or social issues. Student A began Term 1 in biology but changed to chemistry
after the first two weeks.

Learning Level

Qualitative data was collected using observations to establish prior knowledge, understanding of
content being taught, and the ability to learn new knowledge. Lessons were planned in accordance
with 21st Century learning principles and students were given traffic light signs in which they could
indicate if they understood a principle or required further explanation. Lessons fostered a student-
centred classroom in which students took control of the learning activities, and games were
incorporated to engage students and to assess their understanding.

From classroom lessons, the following learning levels of Student A were noted:

The student has a low level of English in comparison to her classmates. Student A can
comprehend most information but at a slower rate than her peers. However, she is unable
to speak, read, or write fluently in English.
The student has low level of foundational knowledge of Chemistry principles and has no
knowledge of the critical content taught in the first two weeks of Term 1.
There is no evidence of intellectual, social, or behavioural issues. However, teaching for a
longer timeframe may have revealed these.

Learning Impacts

Student A experiences interconnecting and compounding learning disadvantages including low

English literacy levels, low SES, and a beginning student in Chemistry.

A Students SES is linked with their educational performance, with students from low SES performing
at a lower academic level (e.g. Croizet & Claire, 1998; Gonski et al, 2011) and being twice as likely to
have learning difficulties (Morgan et al., 2009). There are several contributing factors that have been
identified including stress in the home environment, low educational levels of families, and less
exposure to educational materials during development (McDevitt, 2012; Aikens & Barbarin, 2008).
These are often related to financial pressure and being unable to afford educational resources (Orr,
2003).

Studying in a second language presents additional challenges. To be successful in studying other

subjects (such as chemistry), students should participate and become fluent in a variety of literacy
components including reading, writing, and speaking to improve comprehension (Duff, 2001). It is
also beneficial for students to have some understanding of the subject prior to undertaking learning
it in a different language (Duff, 2011). Student A has neither of these, that is the ability to
comprehend English fluently or knowledge of basic chemistry principles.

Many Malay students receive additional tuition outside of their general schools English class from
an early age, which comes at an additional cost to families. Student As English level being
significantly lower than her peers indicates she may not be receiving this additional support, which
may be directly related to her SES. However, Student A comprehends more English that is spoken to
her than she can fluently write, read, or speak which could be highly beneficial to educators.

Student A missed the first two weeks of Chemistry classes, in which critical foundational knowledge
was delivered to students. This content included the structure of an atom in which dictates
chemistry principles that will be taught during the year. The student will be unable to learn other
content until she has a well-developed understanding of these initial crucial components.

Meeting Student As learning needs

There are several classroom strategies that assisted to meet Students As learning needs, including:

The use of traffic light signs to enable educators to identify when Student A is unsure of the
content although observations suggest that Student A only used these if prompted (only
students confident in learning chemistry used these consistently).
Student A was assigned or chose a group depending on the lessons learning objectives.
Sometimes it was beneficial for student A to choose to be in a group with close peers in
which she would feel comfortable learning from, and other times it was beneficial for her to
be with students that understood the content well and could explain it to her, translating to
Malay if necessary.
Student A received additional one-on-one support during lessons to explain background
information, and a peer may have been chosen translate the information to Malay.
The student received opportunities to use the information learnt in a meaningful way, and
received positive encouragement.
Lessons incorporate demonstrations and diagrams to assist this students understanding.

Plan for developing learning

This plan is two-fold; improve the students English literacy levels and improve chemistry knowledge.
The strategies are targeted towards developing a low SES students learning outcomes. However,
implementing strategies targeted towards these students into a school and classroom also enables
the general school population to excel (Thayer, 2000).

Strategy Responsible for Timing

implementation
 Teachers to meet with the student and her Teachers, Immediate, 3 and 9
family to develop support networks and a plan school, family, month reviews
of action student
Summative and formative assessment that Teachers Immediate, 3 and 9
enable to student to demonstrate skills and month (during plan
abilities, including any improvements, to support of action reviews)
the plan of action reviews
The student to participate in the schools Student Immediate, on-going
English club
Develop a positive and non-threatening learning Teachers Immediate, on-going
environment
Additional support to learn foundational Teachers Immediate,
chemistry principles temporary
Support to learning new chemistry principles, Teachers Immediate, on-going
with differentiated activities
Develop peer program to enable chemistry Teacher Immediate, on-going
content to be translated to Malay, when (initially),
required students
Develop academic confidence including in class Teachers Immediate, on-going
and using the schools mentorship program

The brief classroom time presented issues in assessing the students learning needs, and the
educational disadvantages discussed are those that are immediately evident. Further observation
and student support is necessary to identify any other challenges that the student may be
experiencing.

Conclusion

Although there are differences in Malaysias educational system in comparison to Australia, it is

evident that students experience the same challenges and factors of educational disadvantage.
Students require the same level of support to overcome these challenges which should come from a
variety of sources, both within the school and at home.

References

Aikens, N. L., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Socioeconomic differences in reading trajectories: The
contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100,
235-251.

Croizet, J. C., & Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The
intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(6), 588-594.

Duff, P. (2001). Language, literacy, content, and (pop) culture: Challenges for ESL students in
mainstream courses. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(1), 103-132.

Gonski, D., Boston, K., Greiner, K., Lawrence, C., Scales, B., Tannock, P. (2011). Review of Funding for
Schooling - Final Report. Accessed from:
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-schooling-final-report-
dec-2011.pdf
McDevitt, T.M., Omrod, J.E. (2012). Child Development And Education. 1st ed. Print. P.Ed Australia,
ISBN 9781442564114

Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., & Maczuga, S. (2009). Risk factors for learning-related
behavior problems at 24 months of age: Population-based estimates. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 37, 401-413.

Orr, A. J. (2003). Black-White differences in achievement: The importance of wealth. Sociology of

Education, 76, 281-304.

Thayer, P. B. (2000). Retention of students from first generation and low income backgrounds.
Accessed from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED446633.pdf.