Differentiated Series of Lesson Plans and Justification Statement

A series of lesson plans has been differentiated and modified to provide

learning opportunities and experiences to a group of students that is relevant,

meaningful and enlightening. The series of lesson plans is based on a unit named

‘Save the Sea’ which was originally based on plastic pollution, but has been modified

to recycling. Modification has been made in four learning experiences involving

content, process, product and learning environment. To provide a concise overview of

the group of learners, the group involves the environmental school group which has

approximately twenty students who are all at different year group levels, ranging from

year two to year four. They regularly engage in meaningful collaborative work based

on the environment, and therefore, their interests align with the content of the unit

plan. The group involves mixed-abilities across various curriculum areas especially

with age group differences, however, strengths and weaknesses may vary depending

on the tasks of the lesson. For example, some students may have strengths in visual

art and could assist struggling students in the product during their collaborative work.

Modification has also been made to the assessment, which has changed from

‘assessment of learning’ to ‘assesment for learning’. Specifially, students will self-

assess their own work throughout the learning process by reflecting on their

development and work against the co-constructed success criteria, instead of the

teacher assessing the students work at the end of the learning process which was the

initial assessment method. This essay will justify the differentiated series of lesson

plans and why they were modified, using supporting research and evidence.

Justification will be made towards the content of the lesson plans, the process, the
product, the learning environment and the assessment used as part of the product

learning experience.

The unit was originally based on plastic pollution, but has been modified to

recycling. There are a variety of reasons for this, using relevant research to support

this decision. Modification to curriculum content can be defined as a course of

teaching and learning that differs, based on the context and difficulty, in comparison

to what the majority of students learn (Foreman & Arthur-Kelly, 2014). Firstly, the

modification considered the readiness for the group of learners I was working with. I

believe that the plastic-pollution unit was content-heavy, especially considering the

mixed-ability where the topic could be very unfamiliar to some students, and

considering I taught only four sessions. Therefore narrowing it down to recycling can

be deemed more achieveable. Tomlinson (2014) stresses the importance of readiness,

stating that more structured and concrete topics, with simpler reading skills – such as

‘The Lorax’ by Dr Seuss – can increase student interest and motivation. Using a

picture book can allow the students to learn in a meaningful and authentic way, that is

relevant to the students to help them make better connections and understandings

towards the world (Tomlinson, 2014). Therefore, simplifying both the content and the

method that students will access the content will be beneficial for the students to

increase their understandings on a topic that may be unfamiliar to the students.

Another reason for the modification is to apply the mastery learning approach.

Foreman and Arthur-Kelly (2014) discuss the underlying principle of the approach,

stating that new or unfamiliar content should be taught in small amounts, and that

students should not be exposed to complex content or skills. Therefore, it is

inappropriate to expose students to plastic pollution as complex content, and instead

focus on recycling where students have the opportunity to master the content in this

area. It is clear that the modification of the content allows students more opportunity

for learning and development, by creating more relevant and simplified information

for students to understand, and by allowing them to gain deeper knowledge about

recycling using the mastery learning approach. These modifications can result in

enhanced engagement and increased achievement levels.

The process for learning was originally to make booklets based on the

research we discovered on plastic pollution; it has been modified to a beach visit

where students will gather recyclable materials and classify them. This modification

demonstrates a change from independent and research-based learning to an interactive

and collaborative activity. Being interactive and collaborative during learning

provides an opportunity to learn content in an explorative way. Tomlinson (2014)

refers to such learning through ‘joyful learning’ which emphasises the need for

exploring and understanding, while maintaining important content knowledge. This is

evident though a beach visit because students are given the learning opportunity to

explore outside the classroom while learning about recycling, a serious societal issue.

Strickland (2007) adds to this, stating that students readiness and interests must be

taken into account, so they can learn through an approach they are comfortable with.

Taking the students to visit a beach can align with their readiness and interests,

because they are learning alongside their peers which does not require complex

content, and students interests align with visits or learning opportunities outside the

classroom. The beach visit can also have a central focus on inclusion, which is

important to connect students as being part of a wider society (Foreman & Arthur-

Kelly, 2014). Inclusion is necessary for the diverse group of learners because it can
create an impact on their learning when they are valued and appreciated alongside

their peers. This modified process can be considered a culturally responsive approach,

where students engage in a responsive learning environment with challenging

experiences, which can provide opportunity to develop and display the variety of

abilities the group of learners have. Students can engage in deeper and creative

thinking as they interact with an environment rich in materials that requires active

participation and experimentation (Smith, 2012). Therefore, it is evident that the

modified process for learning can result in greater postitive outcomes for the group of

learners, including success in learning.

The original product was the completed research booklet, filled with

information based on plastic pollution. The product has been modified, and students

will now work in groups to create sculptures from the recyclable materials collected

from the beach visit. There are also a variety of reasons for this modification,

however, the greatest reason is that the original product was too complex and

unmotivating for the students. Instead, the students can work collaboratively towards

a product they enjoy and are engaged in. Foreman and Arthur-Kelly (2014) state the

use of flexible alternatives in learning, which includes using materials in diverse

ways, expressing ideas, using a variety of students’ strategies and portraying

meaningful messages. These can all be achieved by creating sculptures from

recyclable materials. Strickland (2007) also expresses the importance of giving

students the ability to decision-make and choose. Students are given the freedom of

choice in their sculptures, as they can create in any way they like. This modification

also allows student to shift from being a ‘consumer’ of knowledge to a ‘producer’ of

knowledge. According to Tomlinson (2014), a goal for teachers is to encourage

students to take charge of their own learning, where they can set goals and track their

progress which encourages reflection of their learning and leads to independence,

agency and self-efficacy. This aligns with the assessment for the unit, where students

will use goal-setting strategies to self-assess their products. The assessment will

involve a negotiated success criteria that is co-constructed with the students after

reviewing a variety of sculpture samples; and students will reflect on their products

during and after creating their products, reviewing their products in relation to the

success criteria. According to Davies and Hill (2009) self-assessment is a continuous

cycle of learning and reflecting, critical in all learning. This is enhanced when

teachers emphasise the importance of making mistakes to develop further learning, so

that students can learn to value their own mistakes. Davies and Hill (2009) also stress

the importance of using samples, because it can provide an example of success, and

gives a clear message to the students about what is expected from their learning. From

the supporting research, it is evident that using self-assessment is a valuable method

of assessment to use for learning to create positive outcomes on student’s

understanding of development.

Initially, students worked independently on their booklets as we researched

plastic pollution. Instead, students will be working collaboratively in flexible mixed-

ability groups as they create their products. A variety of research has found the

advantages and benefits of students working in flexible groups. According to

Foreman and Arthur-Kelly (2014), collaborative learning provides students an

opportunity to work together using a diverse range of abilities to achieve learning

intentions. The concept of inclusion can also be provided in such collaborative

learning, because students can get involved based on their interests and strengths to
strive for success. When students work in groups, they can work in different situations

compared to working independently, for example, students can recognise different

roles, contexts and situations they work in (Strickland, 2007). In turn, this can help

them realise their strengths and weaknesses, and by working collaboratively, they can

use their strengths to support their peers, and can be supported in areas of weakness.

McDonald et al., (2016) add to this, discussing how flexible grouping can be matched

according to readiness, interests or social groupings. Given that the group of learners

involved in the ‘Save the Sea’ unit is the environment school group, they

automatically share interests in the content of the unit. The smaller groups will be

matched according to other personal interests, allowing mixed-ability. Mixed-ability

groups have demonstrated positive outcomes for students, particularly middle-ability

students who enjoyed working with mixed-ability students. This opportunity expands

the ability to support others and be supported based on strengths and weaknesses.

According to McDonald et al., (2016), an ideal classroom consist of flexible

grouping, a strong classroom climate and encouraging students to set goals. A strong

classroom climate can be achieved by incorporating innovative or improved practices,

positive approaches, and giving students more responsibility to direct classroom

climate (McDonald et al., 2016). Therefore, by providing flexible mixed-ability

grouping, allowing students to set and track their goals, and creating a class climate

through student-responsibility, an ideal learning environment can be achieved.

In conclusion, the series of lesson plans has been modified to enhance the

learning experiences for the students. Modification has involved changes to the

content, process, product, learning environment and assessment of the unit.

Supporting research has contributed towards the justification for the differentiated
lesson plans. The overall findings from research, elaborated in the series of lesson

plans involves the expansion of learning experiences provided that allow the content

to be more relevant to engage in deeper understanding, to be interactive and

collaborative by engaging in flexible mixed-ability groups, and to self-assess

throughout the learning process. These modifications have been made due to the

increase of positive outcomes in comparison to the unmotivating and independent

research-based learning that was previously described. Therefore, the differentiated

series of lesson plans have justified the modifications with positive supporting

evidence.

References:

Davies, A., & Hill, M. (2009). Making classroom assessment work (New Zealand ed).

Wellington, N.Z.: NZCER Press.

Foreman, P., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (Eds.). (2014). Inclusion in action (4th edition).

South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning Australia.

McDonald, L., Flint, A., Rubie-Davies, C. M., Peterson, E. R., Watson, P., & Garrett,

L. (2016). Teaching high-expectation strategies to teachers through an

intervention process. Professional Development in Education, 42(2), 290–307.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.980009

Smith, C. (2012). Gifted and talented students: meeting their needs in New Zealand

schools. New Zealand Ministry of Education. Retrieved from

http://www.library.auckland.ac.nz/external/ebooks/Gifted%20and%20talented

%20students .pdf
Strickland, C. A. (2007). Tools for high-quality differentiated instruction. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of

All Learners (2nd ed). Retrieved from

http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz/lib/auckland/reader.action?ppg=

25&do cID=10883053&tm=1468457824268