All school districts spend a lot of time and money on supporting our students with disabilities because we all see the importance of meeting the needs of individual students while avoiding the stigma of a label. We understand that a “label” should not define a student and, for the most part, do a nice job of providing support for our students with disabilities. What we sometimes forget is that labels are not good for any student and so students who are labeled “gifted” also face dangers in a different form. I was reminded of this fact when I viewed the short video titled, Rethinkng Giftedness, from Jo Boaler. At first, I was disheartened by how even a “positive” label can put a child in a fixed mindset which took me down the road of the importance of considering the jagged learning profile for all kids. Ultimately, this got me thinking about status as it relates to competence in our classrooms.
This idea of status in the classroom, “the perception of student’s academic capability and social desirability” (Horn, 2017, p.62), can be applied across the curriculum, but is probably most evident in a math class. Think back to your own time in school as it relates to the math class. Were you one of the “smart” kids who “got math” because you could come up with the correct answer quickly or were you one of the kids who “didn’t get math”? At minimum, I think it was safe to say how we saw ourselves in math class impacted who we thought we were as a math student (good or bad), but it could also easily carry over to how we see ourselves (good or bad) in school or even beyond as well. These, labels can limit our opportunities, but believe it or not don’t have to be “just the way things are”.
A good portion of the reason why kids, or any of us for that matter, don’t take chances or ask questions is because they don’t want to look stupid. Looking stupid is a social risk that should be avoided at all cost in schools no matter if you have been labeled “good” or “bad” at something. There is a direct correlation between taking a risk and a student’s competence. Naturally, we think people who are “good” at something are competent. However, competence tends to have a very narrow and different definition in the classroom than it does outside of class. Going back to math class as an example, competence is typically associated with fast and accurate answers. Contrary to this thought though, Ilana Horn points out in her book Motivated, competence in math is much more than seamlessly knowing answers. It includes: making astute connections, seeing and describing patterns, developing clear representations, being systematic, and extending ideas (Horn, 2017, p. 61). Students identified as “gifted” by the narrow definition of being quick and accurate suddenly find themselves “incompetent” when put in situations that cause them to struggle or work at a problem. This leads to the same stigma of failure and appearance of lower status, that is shared by those who carry the label “students with disabilities”, and results in the similar tendency of avoidance at all cost. What I am getting at is that the label, good or bad, gets in the way and we must make a concerted effort to support classroom environments that don’t look at students with a label, but instead create a nurturing environment for all students focused on individual strengths and needs.
In math and science class, these environments might include some form of group worthy tasks which allow all students to enter into the activity at any level (low floor) and provide the ability for extension (high ceiling) for those who want to go deeper. In a Social Studies and ELA classroom it should include as much voice and choice as possible, such as with an ELA Reader’s and Writer’s workshop model. All must be safe environments that promote thinking, nurture asking questions over finding answers, and in general look to provide equity in the form of status in the classroom which lead to developing a much broader definition of student competence. Competence, by the way, is one of five areas Horn address in her book as essential for creating motivational classrooms. The others are listed in the graphic below.
I would recommend checking it out as it is a quick read that can get you thinking about how to best meet the needs of all of our kids. No matter the label they carry.
References
Horn, Ilana (2017). Motivated. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Publishing.
No comments:
Post a Comment