Personalized Learning
This week’s reading highlighted the similarities and differences between personalized learning and adaptive learning. Both of these approaches provide students with the opportunity to learn what they need in order to move their thinking forward. These systems take into account the student’s background understanding and build upon this prior knowledge to fill in gaps in understanding or extend into new learning. Technology can be used to support both of these approaches and to tailor learning to each student’s unique needs. However, personalized learning and adaptive learning are not the same. Personalized learning is a broader category of which adaptive learning is one aspect. In both cases, personalized learning and adaptive learning aim for students to learn in their “zone of optimized learning” (Lemke 2013).
Personalized learning can take many different forms. One-on-one tutoring is one form of personalized learning. Small group instruction that is focused on a particular skill that students need is another way to personalize learning. Elementary school teachers are particularly adept at personalizing learning through differentiation. The use of stations or centers around the classroom designed to have students practice a variety of skills are prevalent in elementary classrooms. Each station can be further differentiated based on the needs and abilities of each student so that all students are practicing the same skill but at different levels. Technology is often a key player in stations as one or more of the practice centers.
Adaptive learning can be achieved either through one-on-one tutoring where a tutor adapts learning engagements to a student’s individual needs to fill in gaps in understanding and then move on based on next steps or student interest or through adaptive learning technologies. Schools can purchase ready-made standards-based adaptive learning tools or can choose selected programs or applications to create their own programs. Technology-based programs, such as Dreambox, advertise that the programs pre-assess a student’s knowledge and then adapt learning engagements to each student’s needs. Students can go through the programs at their own pace and remain engaged due to the interactive and exciting visuals that simulate video games (Lemke 2013). However, while one set of statistics show some improvement in reading and math scores of students using these technologies, other studies show that the improvements are marginal (Herold 2017).
In my classroom, I have used IXL.com for math support for my students. While not fully adaptive, students use IXL.com to practice grade level math skills. If students make mistakes IXL.com does two things that are very helpful. First, the program provides an explanation of the error with the necessary information to solve future problems correctly. Second, the program also suggests other skills, either in a lower grade level or fundamental skill at the current grade level, the student should work on to build the necessary background knowledge to successfully complete the current skills. Since IXL.com does not lock students into a particular grade level, students who complete grade-level skills with full accuracy can work on the same skill at the next grade level. Using programs like this allows for both personalized/differentiated learning as well as adaptive technology in the same classroom.
My concern with adaptive technology for differentiation is that it keeps students on a computer taking away the benefit of students collaborating and learning from each other. Using some adaptive technology to address gaps in understanding or to extend students who have mastered the material is helpful but should be balanced with in-person, small group and whole group learning. This is particularly important because for now, adaptive learning technology can be used to address skill development but not higher level thinking and analysis, as well as debate and discussion skills. The role of the teacher within a classroom of students who are engaged in discussion remains critical to whole-child development.
My question is how have you used either personalized learning or adaptive learning with technology in your classrooms?
References:
7 Things You Need to Know About Adaptive Learning (2017). Educause.
7 Things You Should Know About Personalized Learning (2015). Educause.
Tomlinson C. (2017). Let's Celebrate Personalization: But Not Too Fast, In Educational Leadership.
Hi Valeria. I like you interpretations of both adaptive and personalized learning very much - clear and concise descriptions. We too use IXL in our school and, though its a great tool, it is an add-on to what we do in the classroom. It has not become the tutor.
ReplyDeleteWe also use MAP testing and will use the data from those results to inform our curricular planning, grouping of students, etc. In a sense we are adapting what and how we teach individual students and groups based on the data, but the technology does not doing the teaching for us. I like to think of it as human adaptive learning - can that too be called intelligent??
I believe most teachers use some form of personalized learning in their classrooms, whether its giving students some agency over how they perform/present/collate/archive some of their learning, or in the content delivery systems we teachers use for elements of blended/flipped style teaching.
In my school this varies from grade to grade, and in a wider context it varies from school to school, but I am aware there is a quiet revolution taking place in our schools as we all integrate more and more technology into our practice. This will inevitably transform the way students learn and engage with the world.
Valeria,
ReplyDeletePersonalised learning is a norm for us at our school. I am not sure how adaptive would work for us as I have misgivings about the amount of technology time versus face to face / collaborative time. Perhaps this may mean a change in our practise, but I don't think the staff are ready for this yet. I do like the idea of using the adaptive model in a special needs scenario and that is something I feel I need to read more about. Thank you for your thoughts on this.
Hi Valeria,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your blog this week and I share your concern about screen time that you mentioned in your last paragraph.
To address your question: I´ve worked in schools where we have introduced more student choice and autonomy in their learning, but having done more reading on the topic, it seems like a drop in the ocean to what we could be doing. The PYP and MYP programmes (more so than the DP and CP), provide a great framework within which schools are given much autonomy to create curriculum for individual student needs. I would like to challenge myself and the faculty to do more with this opportunity. Saying that, we cannot expect teachers to radically change their practice without sufficient PD and support. Within an IB framework (and many others) teachers are already trained in inquiry and project-based learning, but may need additional support and training in facilitating a more personalised learning environment and taking students to the next level in their learning. I liked how Tomlinson wrote about asking for teacher volunteers as one path to start the implementation process for personalised learning (or indeed any school changes).