Standard 1: Know students and how they learn
Within Standard 1 Teachers demonstrate their knowledge of the myriad of culturally discursive ways in which their students learn. Teachers have a pivotal role to play in nurturing not only comprehension of content, but emerging conceptual understandings of culture and ethics, as well as aptitude socially and emotionally (AITSL, 2010; ACARA, 2015a; Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA], 2008).
Focus Area 1.1: Physical, social and intellectual development and characteristics of students
As evidenced by this excerpt, reflecting on the dichotomisation of mathematics and children’s literature, my personal philosophies privilege agentic, contextualised pedagogy. My belief is that development is not strictly linear and happens in a multitude of ways socially, physically and intellectually, but is interdependent on the bioecological environment (Franck & Nilsen, 2015). Ideologically my classroom is cognizant of the contemporary paradigm of constructivism, as pioneered by seminal theorists such as Vygotsky and Piaget (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2016). Contrary to traditional educational ideology I do not see children as passive recipients of sage knowledge, nor homogeneous beneficiaries of repetition (Clarke & Roche, 2018). Rather that each student arrives innately curious and rich in their own personal funds of knowledge (Reinhardt, 2018).
Focus Area 1.2: Understand how students learn
As illustrated in my (pictured) philosophy statement no student will arrive empty handed, instead they wear their habitus unconsciously, but persistently and view their world, and its increasing abstractions, through it (Robinson and Jones Diaz, 2016 as cited in Arthur, Beecher, Death, Dockett & Farmer, 2017). This is impactful for teaching as every student will utilise this lens in the classroom and accordingly planned delivery of content must be reflective of contextual nuance. Children’s expression is as multifaceted as their development, with Malaguzzi notably declaring the Hundred Languages of Children (HLC). As Mphahlele (2019) notes, semantically the HLC are not exclusively linguistic in their definition or enactment. By being attentive to the myriad of ways in which children choose to express themselves and explore their world we can create learning environments reflective of this. Rather than traditionally static, dialogic and repetition focused we can shift the paradigm towards more interactive, inquiry-based learning and cater to diverse learning styles.
Focus Area 1.3: Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds
My knowledge of diverse learning styles and the necessity to employ a variety of teaching strategies is demonstrated in this excerpt. In critically interrogating a group presentation I did with colleagues, my emerging awareness of neurodivergence, cultural literacy and the consequences for classroom interactions are evident (Bokova as cited in United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2015, p.3). However, as Martin, Nakata, Nakata and Day (2017) maintain cultural literacy hinges not only intentionally inclusive language and transformative ideological shifts, but on avoidance of othering students by reducing minorities to homogenous groups (Coloma, 2017). In my future classroom one essential element I will incorporate in nurturing rich and authentic cultural cohesion is thoughtful selection of literature. Diverse, high quality, contextualised books which mirror the lived experiences of students and present a window into the lived experiences of their peers, are crucial for all students, but especially for those who are marginalised (Bishop as cited in Allan, 2016, p. 4).
Focus Area 1.4: Strategies for teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
As illustrated in this section of an essay I wrote, First Nations students’ voices, linguistic and cultural identities are still overwhelmingly silenced in educational discourse. Alarmingly, attendance in secondary school is reflective of this with only 61% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island students in contrast to the 81% of their 15 to 17-year-old non-Indigenous peers (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). Authentic celebration of culture, language and identity is owed not only to Indigenous students for its crucial role in academic success, but to all students for its potential pedagogically, but also in promoting students emerging ethical, social and emotional understandings (Shay & Wickes, 2017; United Nations, 2008; ACARA, 2015a; MCEETYA, 2008). Incorporating Indigenous pedagogy, such as 8 Ways, invites students, irrespective of cultural background or learning style, to engage with Indigenous ways of knowing and their world through multisensory interactions and inquiry-based learning (New South Wales Department of Education and Communities, 2012).
Focus Area 1.5: Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities
As asserted throughout Standard 1 educational discourse is increasingly aware that the traditional expectation of neurotypical students and homogeneously static content delivery is fallacious (Skamp, 2018). This however does not necessarily signal the end seminal content, but rather demands of teachers nuanced differentiation and strategic delivery. As evidenced in this extract from a Literacy Unit I co-wrote with a colleague differentiation can be as subtly interwoven as visual cues and as distinct as varied assessment product. In this unit students were scaffolded in oral and written narrative and a range of differentiation was utilized. For example, assistive technologies (Clicker Docs), visual learning and scaffolds (e.g. mind map, narrative structure poster, assessment checklist), pedagogy (Gradual Release of Responsibility [GRR], modelled reading/vocabulary), varied groupings and environment (Zone of Proximal Development [ZPD], kinaesthetic learners) and ICT rich extensions for high achieving students were all incorporated (Crick Software, 2014; ACARA, 2014; Woolfolk & Margetts, 2016; Special Broadcasting Service [SBS], 2015).
Focus Area 1.6: Strategies to support full participation of students with disability
As evidenced in this script and example differentiation participation of students with disability is not a one size fits all model, nor is it exclusively environment driven. Broadly, strategic adjustments to process will be invaluable for some students with physical disabilities, where content or product differentiation may be for others with intellectual disabilities. As Foreman and Arthur-Kelly (2014) stress any visible differentiation to the curriculum and classroom must be managed with nuance to limit the social and ethical impact on students with disabilities (UNESCO, 1994). Merely being present does not translate automatically to students with disabilities being included in a learning community, their right to meaningful education and justice and respect must also be upheld (QCT, 2008; Commonwealth of Australia, 2005; United Nations General Assembly, 1989).