Differentiating Learning - Video

Refl ecti on for TRB Standard 3 / Lisa Dumoulin

Standard 3: Educators understand and apply knowledge of student growth and development.
Educators are knowledgeable about how children develop as learners and as social beings,
and demonstrate an understanding of individual learning differences and special needs. This
knowledge is used to assist educators in making decisions about curriculum, instruction,
assessment and classroom management (TRB Standards).

What evidence have I chosen to support this standard?

I have chosen a video that I produced for our course work in Methods for Teaching Language
Acquisition. In the video, I describe my philosophy for working with students who are learning in
a new language and the educational supports I will try to provide for these students.

What did I learn in creating this piece of evidence?

As I describe in the video, my philosophy is informed by Shelley Moores work on inclusive
education teaching to the edges, and its overlaps with Universal Design for Learning.
The philosophy and supports that I believe are necessary for supporting students learning in a
new language, are also what I believe (based on my study of Moores work and Universal Design
for Learning) to be good teaching. They are supports that I hope to incorporate in my teaching,
with all students.

On another note, in making the video, I learned some techniques for filming. I read about
lighting and filming for interviews. I also gained more familiarity with using iMovie, including
how to incorporate and edit audio clips as part of the film.

How does this evidence relate to the TRB standard?

This relates to the TRB standard, because it highlights my understanding that all students are
individuals who learn and develop at their own pace. As Shelley Moore explains, true inclusive
education presumes that all students have unique strengths and stretches. This is in contrast to
educational models that have long advocated that we teach to the middle and extend and
support our students at the edges, by adapting our lesson geared for all. Embracing the
philosophy Moore advocates (which, from my experience, seems to align with Universal Design
for Learning) requires instead that we teach to all students, by beginning at our edges and
providing scaffolds and choices that allow students to grow and learn in ways that match and
extend their development. In concrete terms, this is like what Marilyn Burns calls low-floor,
high-ceiling teaching: providing entry points for all students, with the potential and supports for
students to extend their learning/understanding as they think, discuss, play and practice.

Why is this standard important to me?

Of all of the academically focused standards, this standard speaks to me the strongest.
Attachment theory, underlining the necessity of relationships and connections as a precursor to
learning, and the theory behind Moores approach to inclusive education, described above, will
form the basis of my practice as a new teacher. These approaches, hand-in-hand, speak to me,
because they match what I have experienced first-hand in working with children and youth in
various contexts. They also reflect teachings in Indigenous pedagogies, and what I would
describe as good practice for any caring profession. It is important to me that I and my
colleagues are informed and committed to continuously learning and trying to live the best
research and practices for inclusive education. I also believe it is through this, that our
education system will continue to evolve to match what we know is best for children, families
and communities. This standard puts the child before academics, just as I believe educators
must do.