WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 1

Standard

A teacher teaches with respect for their individual and cultural characteristics.

Candidates understand how elementary students differ in their development and approach to

learning and create instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse students.

Diversity Framing Statement

Classrooms are reflective of the communities they serve. This includes students with

differences related to culture, preferred learning style, and academic strengths and weaknesses.

The educational system, however, has “historically … approached … a one size fits all manner

without regard to student differences” (Adkins & Guerreiro, 2018, p. 574). The need to assess

individual student needs, use a variety of learning activities to address these needs, and celebrate

the unique contributions that student differences bring to a learning community has been a theme

throughout my master’s program. One artifact that reflects my understanding of how to use

varied processes and products to meet both students’ individual needs and academic standards is

a lesson plan I developed during my classroom management course.

My lesson started with identifying a standard from the health curriculum, and then

designing objectives related to that standard; the topic of the lesson was identification of

emotions. In order to use a variety of learning processes within the lesson, I designed three

student centers that allowed students to participate in activities using different learning styles to

achieve the academic goals of the lesson. These centers used activities that incorporated verbal

linguistic, visual-spatial, and bodily kinesthetic methods in the learning process. This is in part

based on the work of Howard Gardner (1995), whose multiple intelligences theory highlighted

ways educators could provide students with different methods to achieve a common learning

objective. This theory, in practice, includes the recommendation that teachers “… include a
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 2

variety of presentation modes in each lesson to expand the number of students who are likely to

succeed (Slavin, 2018, p. 91). Educational researchers who have reviewed and conducted brain-

based studies also advocate using a variety of instructional approaches. Sousa and Tomlinson

(2018) explain that when lessons are presented in a variety of ways student interest, motivation,

and understanding improve. Researchers have noted “… that learning should not be primarily

oriented on products, but on process, and therefore, teachers should use methods that provoke

student’s higher order thinking instead of mere memorizing the facts” (Leshkovska & Spaseva,

2016, p. 63). In this lesson, students were able to use their background knowledge to creatively

write, draw images, and act out different emotions, rather than focus on memorizing a list of

definitions or filling in blanks on a worksheet.

Another instructional framework that influenced the design of my lesson is the Universal

Design for Learning (UDL) philosophy. “UDL is a learning approach that designs curricular

materials, activities, and instruction with the flexibility to meet individual learners’ strengths and

needs so all students can have access to what is being learned in the class” (Smith Canter, et al.,

2017, pp. 2-3). Student diversity in cultural backgrounds, learning needs, and preferred learning

methods can be met by this intentional focus on making the curriculum accessible to all students.

Tomlinson and McTighe (2006) explain that the Universal Design for Learning approach to

instructional planning should allow students to “… express their learning in ways that best suit

their strengths and interests through varied products and performances (e.g. writing, speaking,

acting, or visually representing” (p. 21). While my example provides three different approaches

to a learning goal within the same lesson (writing, drawing, and acting), not every lesson needs

to be structured this way. Students’ academic needs can be met by intentionally planning a

variety of lessons using different learning modalities throughout the teaching of a unit, and
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 3

adapting these lessons for specific student strengths and weaknesses. Harvey and Goudvis (2017)

explain that responsive teachers should be most of all flexible and adaptable to the individual

needs of students. 

In addition to accommodating learning styles, processes, and products, addressing

diversity should also take into account that students are at different levels of academic

achievement and might have identified disabilities that require accommodations. In my lesson

plan, I have addressed this by including suggested adaptations for students who might need

assistance in reading or writing. Tomlinson (2014) focuses on differentiation as an approach that

emphasizes individual growth, rather than an emphasis on everyone achieving the same goal

within the same time frame. In order to achieve this individualized approach, other adults may

be co-teachers or assistants in the classroom to provide addition support and coaching. Studies

done regarding educational practices for students with disabilities have noted “… many

American schools and districts are moving toward more inclusive practices, spurring a great need

for more intentional and effective collaboration techniques and practices” (Solone, et al., 2020, p.

283). During my differentiated lesson my host teacher was primarily observing, however there

have been other lessons where a special education aide came into the classroom to assist a small

group of students with writing. My lesson design could have seamlessly integrated additional

adults as instructional coaches in the centers to provide even more support or individualized

guidance as needed. I recognize that in order to meet the diverse needs of students, I am a

member of an educational team that includes other educators such as special education and

English language learner specialists, parents, and the students themselves. Collaboration is one

key to successfully implementing the principles of the Universal Design for Learning approach

and meeting the diverse needs of students.

WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 4

Learning about diversity and how to intentionally create a classroom program that takes

into account student needs is a complex topic, but at heart it is a simple concept. It starts with

the belief that “… for all students in our schools to achieve their potential both as learners and as

productive members of our society, high-quality programs are essential” (Echevarria & Graves,

2015, p. 4). Creating lessons that include differentiated opportunities for students to become

engaged and successful in the learning process is the first step towards achieving this goal.
WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 5

References

Adkins, D., & Guerreiro, M. (2018). Learning styles: Considerations for technology enhanced

item design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 574–583. https://doi-

org.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/10.1111/bjet.12556

Echevarría, J., & Graves, A. W. (2015). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English

learners with diverse abilities (Fifth edition.). Pearson.

Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 200.

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=f6h&AN=9512053705&site=eds-live&scope=site

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2017). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for

engagement, understanding, and building knowledge, grades K-8. Third edition.

Stenhouse Publishers. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1521987&site=ehost-live

Leshkovska, E. A., & Spaseva, S. M. (2016). John Dewey’s educational theory and educational

implications of Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory. International Journal of

Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering & Education (IJCRSEE), 4(2), 57–66.

https://doi-org.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/10.5937/IJCRSEE1602057A

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. NY, NY: Pearson.

Smith Canter, L. L., King, L. H., Williams, J. B., Metcalf, D., & Rhys Myrick Potts, K. (2017).

Evaluating pedagogy and practice of universal design for learning in public

schools. Exceptionality Education International, 27(1), 1–16.

WOOD MASTER’S PORTFOLIO 6

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edo&AN=122431125&site=eds-live&scope=site

Solone, C. J., Thornton, B. E., Chiappe, J. C., Perez, C., Rearick, M. K., & Falvey, M. A. (2020).

Creating collaborative schools in the United States: A review of best

practices. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(3), 283–292.

http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uas.alaska.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=edo&AN=141538904&site=eds-live&scope=site

Sousa, D. A. & Tomlinson, C.A. (2018). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience

supports the learner-friendly classroom. Solution Tree Press, Bloomington, IN.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). Differentiated classrooms: Responding to the needs of all learners 2nd

ed. ASCD

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction + understanding

by design. ASCD, Alexandria, Virginia.