View
214
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Moderate Learning Difficulties: the term, Lesson Study and
pedagogic implications
Rationale for study - pupils with moderate learning difficulties (MLD) represent the largest
proportion of those identified as having special educational needs in the school system,
Neglected as a focus for educational initiatives. - 25% of all pupils identified as having SEN at school action plus or with
Statements in ordinary and special schools Neglect attributed to several factors. – come disproportionately from families who experience socio-economic
disadvantage
– no well established advocacy or voluntary group dedicated to the interests of these pupils
– historic uncertainty about pupils with MLD : between those with severe intellectual disabilities and ‘normal’ pupils who are lower attaining
– =
Moderate learning difficulties:
1. Not low attainment – not severe intellectual disability2. Traditionally defined in IQ terms : 50/55-70 range3. Subject to much critique – ethnic / cultural bias/ use
of IQ; intelligence tests 4. Terminology changes/sensitivity: Mental deficiency,
Educational imbeciles, Feeble minded, Mild /moderate educational subnormal, Educational mentally retarded, Mild/moderate intellectual disability
5. Terms and meaning vary internationally 6. Socially constructed term – serving dominant interests7. Raises questions about : what is special education,
who needs it? 8. ‘Acid test’ of inclusion policies.
Definition of MLD: DfES, 2003 Pupils with moderate learning difficulties will have attainments significantly below expected levels in most areas of the curriculum, despite appropriate interventions. Their needs will not be able to be met by normal differentiation and the flexibilities of the National Curriculum.They should only be recorded as MLD if additional educational provision is being made to help them to access the curriculum.
Pupils with moderate learning difficulties have much greater difficulty than their peers in acquiring basic literacy and numeracy skills and in understanding concepts. They may also have associated speech and language delay, low self-esteem, low levels of concentration and under-developed social skills.” (
MLD definition and identification
Area Sub-area
Child functioning Significant low attainment in most areas of curriculum Literacy
numeracy
Other e.g. science
Much greater difficulty in understanding concepts
Verbal and non-verbal reasoning: verbal concepts
Speech and language delay Age level dependent
Low self esteem
Low level of concentration
Under-developed social skills
Environmental factors School attendance
Additional teaching programmes
MLD definition and identification: Child functioning
OptionsSignificant low attainment in most areas of curriculum
Numeracy / literacy 1 Centile cut off for standardised test (e.g. below 5th centile)
2 Teacher assessed level(e.g. defined level below expected level (varies according to age)
3 SAT level (test results) e.g. defined level below expected level (varies according to age)
Other e.g. science Similar options as above
Much greater difficulty in understanding concepts
Verbal and non-verbal reasoning: verbal concepts
1 Teacher assessment (year/class group referenced e.g. lowest 1-2 )
2 Cognitive ability tests (On CAT, WISC, BAS e.g. lowest 2-5 centile)
3 Dynamic assessment (teaching assessment; teacher assessment based on degree of gain in response to assistance)
Table 1: Crowther et al. (2001) system for defining MLD
Associated with Milder learning difficulties
More severe learning difficulties
No other significant difficulties
Significant emotional and behavioural difficulties
Significant sensory/medical difficulties
Concept map of themes in LEA definitions’ of MLD term not use associated not SLD norterm difficulties SpLD
MLD specify cut-off
low low lowcognitive attainment attainmentability and ability cross
curriculum
DCSF (2010)
% of pupils with Statements/SA+ in each areas of SEN achieving level 4+ in Eng and Maths
% numbers
Specific LD 22.7 9,042
Moderate LD 11.1 19,480
Beh, Emot Soc D 36.2 12,116
Visual Impairment 52.5 652
3 prototypes (research on LA use) :
1. definitions in terms of low curriculum attainments (all / a number), with cut-offs specified and with associated areas of difficulties; 2. definitions in terms of low attainments AND cognitive abilities, with cut-offs specified, distinguished from severe and specific learning difficulties and with associated areas of difficulties; 3. not use MLD term.
Phase 1 research shows:
- Pupils identified by secondary schools as having MLD fall into 3 subgroups groups and illustrated (Ylonen and Norwich 2011):• Those with low attainment and low concept understanding and reasoning (model 1)• Those with low attainment only (model 2)• Identified as MLD but not with low attainment nor concept understanding/ reasoning (model 3).
These findings suggest that some pupils are identified as having MLD inappropriately (group 3), while for others ‘conceptual understanding and reasoning’ are not used as indicators of MLD.
BAS matrices and verbal similarities (reasoning) T-scores (%)
Score of under 30 = in the lowest 2% of age groupScore between 31-40 = in the lowest 2-16% of age groupScore between 41-50 = 17-50% Score of 51 and above = 50% + (above average)
BAS spelling and reading (literacy) standard scores (%)
Scores below 70 = in the lowest 2% of age groupScores between 70.5-85 = in the lowest 2-16%Scores between 85.5 and 100 = 17-50%Scores of 100.5 and above = 50% + (above average)
Is there a difference between MLD, low attainment and specific learning difficulties SpLD?
- depends on definition:
i. attainment only OR
ii. attainment AND cognitive ability
- MLD as general learning difficulty; SpLD as specific difficulty
- categoric versus dimensional (continuum position)
- dimensional with pragmatic cut offs
Specific
LD
General LD: MLD
Specific – general learning difficulties
Range of attainments
MLD low attaining average attaining high attaining
Uneven attainments
Even attainments
CUT OFFS?
Why use the term MLD? Is it a disability, like severe learning diffiuclties?Or is it just very low attainment?
- Raises dilemma about differentiating this group
1.If do we identify MLD as an area of SEN / disability?
Risks – negative labelling, false identification as disability/SEN 2. If do we not identify it as difficulty / disability
but as part of the continuum of attainment?
Risks – overlook rights / needs of some vulnerable pupils,
lose additional resources
3 options for resolving dilemma:
1. Retain and specify MLD category as an area of SEN
2. Abandon MLD as a SEN category: consider as very low attainment provide in terms of compensatory education / social inclusion framework.
3. Abandon MLD for majority, redefine new tighter category of mild mixed difficulties for minority.
What positive difference does this make for teaching?
Is there a specific set of MLD relevant teaching strategies?
- Little research; what written suggests no MLD specific pedagogy teaching (Fletcher-Campbell, 2004)
- various teaching approaches relevant to MLD but also relevant to pupils with lower attainment
Continua of pedagogic strategies: - appropriate teaching as - intensification and more focussed extension - of general teaching approaches(Lewis and Norwich, 2004)
Model of teaching strategies (from phase 1 research)
• Broad pedagogic approach: – Pedagogic methods/assumptions– Activity based learning– Assessment for learning
• Input (multi-modal/sensory approaches)• Cognitive demand:
– Level/style (differentiation)– Memory/consolidation
• Motivational approaches• Learning relationships
– Grouping and peer support– Adult-pupil communication
• Working with additional adults
Pedagogic approaches
Generic intensified / SEN
Generic adapted/Low attaining to above average
Is there a specialist pedagogy for MLD?
Evaluation of phase 1 Lesson StudyProcesses: more than 90% of teachers agreed with
mostly/definitely • Novelty and practical relevance of LS makes you interested in
lesson development for pupils with MLD• wider awareness of LS process enhances confidence in
teaching pupils with MLD• LS provides micro-focus on learning of 1-2 students to enable
greater depth of analysis• participating teachers feel less threatened to scrutinise their
teaching by focusing on pupil learning rather than evaluating teaching.
• LS enables participating teachers to think about themselves
as innovators in their schools.
Evaluation of phase 1 Lesson StudyOutcomes: more than 90% of teachers agreed with
mostly/definitely • more theoretical and practical knowledge about LS• more understanding about nature and complexity of the learning needs of pupils with MLD.
• increased capability to plan and differentiate in your teaching of pupils with MLD
• more confidence to try out novel teaching approaches in lessons
• LS process has improved the quality of planning of your teaching (not just how to refine specific lesson.)
Lesson Study methodology components:-developing ground rules for working in joint research mode,• using case pupils (small number of pupils around whom the development is focussed),• identifying what to learn and why; the research focus,• drawing on what has been learned already about this focus, • joint planning,• joint observation (data capture)• analysing and recording of what has been learned from case pupils and by researchers,• capturing and distilling practice / data (through using videos, stills and audios)• finding ways of helping others to learn from what has been learned (innovated, refined, modified),•creating an artefact to communicate this (e.g. powerpoint, video, coaching guide, etc.) and using it.
What do we know about focus on MLD that is relevant to Lesson Study developments?
Studies indicate :
1. weaker intellectual abilities; reasoning, problem solving, thinking skills etc.
2. weaker working memory: phonological, spatial, executive control
3. issues about self esteem, motivation and independent learning
Way forward: adopt research based ideas and practices to inform the review and planning aspects of Lesson Study- Thinking skills- Motivation strategies- Working memory supports
1. Thinking skills: National Curriculum thinking skills:
1. Information processing, e.g. sort and classify2. Reasoning e.g. draw inferences and make
deductions
3. Enquiry, e.g. ask relevant questions
4. Creative thinking, e.g. generate and extend idea
5. Evaluation, e.g. judge the value of what they read, hear and do
2. Motivation strategies
ARCS model (Keller)
Design guidelines for developing effective motivational strategies
Attention
Relevance
Confidence
Satisfaction
ATTENTION - perceptual arousal- inquiry arousal- variability /novelty
RELEVANCE - goal orientation- motive matching
CONFIDENCE - learning requirements- success opportunities- personal responsibility
SATISFACTION - intrinsic reinforcement- extrinsic rewards- equity
ARCS model: expectancy – value model
Motivational observation/interviewing schedule:
Based on areas arising from Motivation Survey based on ARCS
- Areas to be used for classroom observation and interview of pupils about their motivation
- focus on individual and/or group
- on project website
Working memory :
Working Memory and Learning: A Practical Guide for TeachersGathercole and Alloway Sage.
Working memory questionnaire for teachers
Strategies:1.Recognise working memory failures2.Evaluate the working demands of learning activities3.Reduce working memory loads if necessary4.Frequently repeat important information5.Encourage the use of memory aidsWorking memory guide on MLD LS website under resources
30
Using these research informed approach in your Lesson Study in your subject
• What opportunities are there in the lesson that you are focusing on in Lesson Study to integrate teaching that promotes
• Motivation strategies?• Thinking skills?• Monitor and use working memory strategies?
Slide 3.7
Recommended