Case Study Systhesis

Janet's case taught a valuable lesson in "ways to avoid peer labeling."  The way Janet grouped her guided reading groups was based on the reliability of the Reading assessment she was using.  Her groups were homogeneous and lacked cultural variety simultaneously.  Peers began labeling each other as either "low readers" and produced stereotypes between peers based on cultural differences. 

Groups for instruction are constantly mixed.  My personal teaching philosophy is grouping should be mixed purposefully but often.  Students never know why they are with different peers.  Sometimes in my mind, I realize that one low student is with all high students in that specific content area and it is done to give that student a chance to perform and "rise to the occasion."  On other accounts, groups will be mixed by gender..All girl reading groups and all boy reading groups.  Sometimes I let them pick as a reward which relights the spark with reading.."reading IS fun!"  When students are placed into the 'high' group, they don't know they are the high group, but their work is more challenging and requires them to use higher level thinking skills.

Benefits of this approach are never having to explain or defend bias or stereotypes that form due ot labeling.  The draw backs is that students cannot monitor their own growth as easily when levels is 'hush-hush.' I try to have individual conferences with them to inform them on their own reading progress from time to time.

Yes.  Majority of our activities require them to move around, talk to eachother, and engage themselves in group projects that I assess.  I try to stay away from texts and plan lessons that are hands on and provide them with ample opportunities to teach other.

I think that I need to focus more on the lower reading kids.  They need alot of sight word practice and I need to provide them more time to practice and learn strategies in school. 

1. Janet learned the importance of running records and checklists - to see individual reader. Not all readers in the same sub-category are necessarily the same type of reader nor do they feel the same about reading.
2. I admit I do group my students homogeneously for guiding reading. However, I group them heterogeneously for every other subject. I'm not sure if this is good or bad, or even both.
3. I choose books by level - but I usually choose 2-3 for the group to vote and select one to read. i do try to keep in mind interests, and not just reading level. The down side to this is that by grouping homogeneously I'm often left with very basic books for my lower readers. They become easily distracted and I have to work a little at a time to keep their interest.
4. My approach is really only balanced in subjects. I do try to use homogeneously and heterogeneously groupings, but I'm not doing both in all subject areas - they're very specific.
5. Through this case study, I have definitely learned that I need to make the time (even though it's hard!) for my students to be able to share their readings with the whole class, not just their own group. I will also experiment and try grouping students heterogeneously for reading to see if I will come up with different results.

Practicing Teachers:

• What are the key lessons you learned from Janet's case? --- I learned that race and culture should not be used when determing grouping of students. Also, stereotypes should be kept out the work environment. Rather than judging students based on their race, culture, ect, we should observe and get to know our students to determine their individual interests. As teachers, it is our job to take responsibility for knowing our students. We should not let one test or any measure determine our students interests or abilities. Students are indiviuals that do not fit a "one-size fits all" approach.
• How do you group students for instruction in your classroom?--- Personally, I group students by looking at many different factors. I look at performance on DIBELS, classroom observation, social skills ect, to determine the best grouping. I want my groups to be well rounded (some higher students with some lower students). I make sure to look at many variables when determining the best grouping, with that said, I know that I can always improve on my grouping strategies.
• What are the benefits and potential drawbacks of your approach?--- Benefits: My groups are diverse and students are able to learn and model off of one another. Drawbacks: Students interests may not be the same and friendships/relationships may not be formed.
• Is your approach balanced so that children benefit from a variety of opportunities to learn from you and their peers?--- Yes, I try to make sure that students are not always in the same grouping. I may group them one way in centers and another way for other classroom activities. I try to varying grouping and my instructional techniques so that students have a variety of examples, models, and ways to learn.
• What changes are you thinking about?--- I am always thinking of ways to improve my overall teaching and grouping of students. I think as educators, we are always changing and trying things differently from year to year. It is part of our job, as students are always changing we need to meet their individual needs.

1. The most important lesson I learned from Janet's case is to consider many other factors than just reading level when making decisions about my students. She seemed to have more success once she considered the student's interests and background knowledge. I love that Janet started using running records and informal classroom assessments to supplement her decision making process, rather than simply the benchmark data.
2. I teach elementary ESL, so my students are pulled out of the classroom and grouped based on their grade level and WIDA scores. This groups students of similar English proficiency level together. 
3. This approach is very effective. Students of similar language background are grouped together to receive instruction based off their needs and skills. Students are in the regular classroom for the majority of the day where they receive plenty of modeling from other teachers and students who are already proficient in English. ESL is a time to target the necessary skills that still need to develop.
4. I would not make any changes with this approach - I only wish I had more time than 30 minutes with each group.
5. More time with each group would allow students the opportunity to advance their English skills. Sometimes I feel like ESL is a whirlwind and then its over. I would like to have more time to fully teach a lesson and provide time for students to practice and apply the skill without being rushed to the next "scheduled event". 

• We can not make decisions about OUR classes based on any one test, or any one person's opinion, We need to know what is going to be best for our students, in all classroom situations, including small groups. Using tests and the opinions of our colleagues are great resources, but we also need to take preferences, prior knowledge, student interests, etc. into account.
• I do take ability/reading level into account when grouping students, but I also look at prior knowledge, learning preference, preferred role in group settings, maturity level, subject matter being studied, and content of the task, etc.
• I try to always keep my approach balanced so that I am giving the students the opportunity to take whatever information or skills/strategies that I can offer them and then apply it to both classroom situations and situations outside of school. Using multiple types of small and mixed groups allows for this to happen more readily.
• I think we need to start looking at the ways we group students for Reading in the same manner that we group them for other things. A lot of times we allow for multiple grouping situations for other subjects, but we tend to use Reading Levels ONLY for Reading groups.  

I am a literacy coach.  Initially, I agreed with the coach’s comments of tending to the data because it initially seemed like Janet and her colleagues were making excuses.  Digging deeper with access to her thoughts throughout the year, I commend Janet for working as hard as she did to figure things out.  I am appalled that it was the ESL teacher and not the coach who steered her towards book selection and formative assessment.  It seems Janet’s groups shifted three times- benchmark data (fluency), running record data/behavior needs (but not grouped by instructional text level?) and grouped by interest.  While we see that the students are mixed by demographics now, I do not see mention of progress in terms of data (be it benchmark or reading levels).  What would have further highlighted success in this case would have been a note regarding the percentage of her students reading on grade level at the beginning of the school year and then at the end.
In following my district’s curricular  mandates supported by a Balanced Literacy Approach, I support students in engaging the whole class in on-grade level, strategy based instruction and small group guided reading instruction grouped by reading level as documented for formative and summative text reading/comprehension assessment (NOT by DIBELS benchmarks).  I work with them in understanding flexible group opportunities based upon coming needs at various levels.  When not in guided reading, students engage in collaborative or independent tasks.  It is here that I support willing teachers in grouping students by interest in forming literature circles.  I believe that this approach is balanced.  Regarding changes, I see a need in informing all of my staff about heterogeneous interest groups as a supplement to guided reading instruction, not a replacement of.  I also believe my staff needs a professional development focus in formative assessment next year.

Some key points to the case study and reminders I found included… always get feedback from colleagues, collaborate as a team, especially those that work one on one with your students (or in small group). I think it is important when thinking of level grouping that you need to be flexible, temporary, and have various forms of formal and informal assessment. Teaching isn’t about being convenient.
Some common approaches to student groupings at the beginning of the year could be going off of placement forms, various forms of assessment (formal/informal) and working off of high-stake tests! Trying to get all students benchmarked to close that gap.
At times there are so many challenges and pressures as a teacher that it becomes easy to get lost in the rush of things. You want to try your best to give each student the best education/experience…. There truly is a lot to take into consideration. As Afflerbach stated our student success can come from everyday lessons of high engagement, quality work; that build one day upon another. Do our lessons meet the needs of all learners? Can we identify who is getting it, who isn’t, and do we know how to address those students so they do get it! And to be sure those that do get it remain involved and motivated. This is a challenge for me and something that I continuously reflect on and strive to master.     

1. I learned that one standardized test does not give me a clear or correct picture of a student's ability or need.
2. Currently my school insists that we group by DIBEL scores. I have a reading teacher who comes into my room and co-teaches with me so I can't just do what I would like to do. I do however, try to pull students into groups that I know need explicit help on strategies that I may be teaching in another group. I don't like having my students seeing which groups are the higher level readers. This is so wrong. How do we stop this crazy way of grouping when our district is hung up on DIBEL scores and nothing else?
3.The draw backs to the way my school groups is there is no room for interests or choice. Second students know who is smarter by the level they are working on.
4.My approach is not balanced and I want help in making it so.

Based on Janet's experiences, I learned to take many factors into account when grouping students.  I cannot simply base this important decision on one test, but rather a plethora of sources.  I should take test scores, reading levels, social interaction, and interests into account.  I should also allow the students to group themselves based on choices once in a while. 
In my class I often group students based on their prior achievement and reading abilities.  This is great because the students are all reading and hopefully comprehending at the same level; however, if they are not interested in the topic, then they are not getting as much out of the reading as they should. 
I definately plan to tailor my lessons to meet the needs and interests of the students.  I also feel that giving a higher level book to some of my students who are reading at a slightly lower reading level is OK, because this will allow the more advanced readers in the group to help these students out.  After all, students learn a great deal from other students.  These students may also present the concepts in a way that the teacher never even thought about and help the struggling student to understand it.

Through Janet's case, I learned that grouping students based solely on ability should not be the basis of instruction. When grouped only by results of standardized assessments, key teaching opportunities are lost. Students are often presented with information that is thought to be "targeting" their abilities, but is actually hindering other important components of learning, such as interest, prior knowledge and recognition. When attempting to group solely on one focus skill, higher level thinking skills are ignored and are not given the room to flourish.

In my classroom, students are grouped based on ability level, but the groups are fluid. Students are able to move through various groups depending on their progress or struggles. I wish that my groups where based more on interest and other intelligences, but as most teachers, I feel the need to follow expectations.

I fear that students who are functioning in the the "low group" will be stuck there. Movement from that group is not as fluid as other groups. These students develop a reputation since they have met with a Title teacher since first grade. I am afraid that it will be a "life sentence".

My instruction is based on both whole group (utilizing a lot of instructional conversation and interavtice read-alouds) and guided reading. I lead guided reading groups with a discussion based approach. Students learn from the teacher as well as through coversation/experiences with their peers.

As stated before, I would like to change reading group classification standards if I could. I truly believe that mixing ability levels and focusing more on interest and personal connections to self, low students would meet high expectations.

In my classroom, I group students based on what is manageable behaviorally.  So I mix independent workers with those that need one on one to continue working.  My groups are heterogeneous and this seems to work fairly well.  I have only 10 students with significant disabilities.  If I were in a more typical classroom, I think that i would have a variety of groups by ability but also by interest.  I feel that students can learn from others and the diversity that is present.  If I had more students I would group them based on their reading levels to be able to do guided reading. I found it interesting that her groups were of varying sizes and some of the most needy of her students were the largest groups.  It seems to me that would be hard to manage and to guarantee engagement and practice for all students

1. The key lessons I learned from Janet's case is to use more than one asseessmnet to determine a child's ability. I also learned that there are several other factors that should be taken into account when grouping such as interest, ability,etc.
2. I currently do not have my own classroom but I would group students depending on a variety of factors like those i listed in number 1. The groups would vary depending on the activity we were doing as well.
3. I am not sure of all the drawbacks or potential becaus eI have not grouped students in my own

An individual could very well be taught even as people are and even have fun with executing doing it. We all propose which experts claim one and even ponder flipping time period right into being decent. If ever we really are shopping for the purpose of any anyone should think of acquiring an important  canoscan  as a result of some sort of on the web organize. Our optimum procedure to assist you is undoubtedly if you want to look for all by yourself a new fantastic. Many of us suggest highly that experts claim the public as well as bear in mind paying energy straight to turning out to be beneficial. A person could very well discover while you will most certainly be coupled with experience working on it all.