Rachel Sarnoff
M.S. Ed. Candidate, May 2016 | The University of Pennsylvania
B.A. June, 2012 | Dartmouth College
In the Classroom
Although the two classrooms I have experienced this year differ tremendously in grade level, size, demographic, and resources, a similarity across the two is the great diversity of levels and abilities present within a single class. Within the context of both of these classes, enabling mastery experiences for every student, therefore, means thoughtful scaffolding and focused support, without lowering expectations for any student. When articulating the theories of teaching and learning that I called on in developing my Term IV curricular unit, I cited the influence of Tomlinson’s work on my belief that “differentiation is key to effective instruction; however, it must be done purposefully and thoughtfully, not just through extra worksheets or giving students “shortcuts” (Artifact 2). Putting this theory into practice, though, is challenging given the realities of a full and diverse classroom.
Artifact 2: Curriculum Unit Convergence Chart, 2/5/15
During full-group instruction, I also attempted to maximize mastery moments by giving students the opportunity to get an answer right even after an initial failed attempt. Delivering number talks, I early on established the habit of asking students whether they would like to “revise their answer,” a practice which I carried to other math lessons throughout the year. I now commonly circle back to students who previously gave incorrect answers, and give them a chance to demonstrate mastery on a later attempt.
Artifact 5: Differentiated feedback on student work, 4/11/16
To differentiate for my students, I found it necessary to really get to know each of them such that I could identify their strengths and challenges, and build scaffolds for their needs, accordingly. During my Descriptive Profile Review at the end of the first term, both my Penn Mentor and Classroom Mentor noted that one of my strengths lay in my concern for building relationships with individual students, and I believe I put these relationships to use not only for behavioral management purposes, but also for instructional design. As my Penn Mentor wrote in December, I “was very aware of their ability levels and planned lessons that enabled all students to participate” (Artifact 3) and my Classroom Mentor noted that I used “different teaching methods to meet individual needs,” (Artifact 4). I have continued to prioritize differentiation and in a recent book review assignment for my small reading group, I collected drafts that the students wrote on their own, and then catered my comments to their unique areas of growth such that each could work within a “next step” that was both achievable and satisfying to them (Artifact 5). Diferentiation continues to be a challenge for me, but I hope that as I get to know my future students, I can get to know and cater to their individual needs.
Artifacts 3 & 4: Mentor Notes, Descriptive Profile, 12/14/15
It seems that allowing students to correct their mistakes and eventually arrive at mastery may play a significant role in helping students feel comfortable attempting challenging questions and speaking up even when they are not fully confident in their answers. During my Descriptive Profile review at the end of the Fall term, my Classroom Mentor noted that “students feel safe to make mistakes” (Artifact 4); as defined by Bandura, a sense of self-efficacy helps people see difficult tasks as “challenges to be mastered, rather than threats to be avoided” (1994), so this sense of safety in making mistakes is a good indicator of a students’ sense of self-efficacy for it suggests that they believe that, by admitting difficulty, or making a visible mistake, they can and will have the opportunity to get to mastery eventually.
Artifact 4: Classroom Mentor Notes, Descriptive Profile, 12/14/16
Factor 1: Mastery Experiences
We have all likely heard that “Success breeds success,” and indeed, “mastery experiences are the most effective way to boost self-efficacy because people are more likely to believe they can do something new if it is similar to something they have already done well” (Bandura, 1994). It follows, therefore, that teachers should be concerned with enabling students to have mastery experiences, and extending the impact of these experiences by linking them to future learning. Providing all students with the opportunity to have mastery experiences requires appropriate scaffolding such that all students can achieve success on assignments and assessments, big and small. This is not to say that encouraging self-efficacy requires that students stay within their comfort zone. To the contrary, according to Bandura, “efficacious people set challenging goals and maintain a strong commitment to them. In the face of impending failure, they increase and sustain their efforts to be successful. They approach difficult or threatening situations with confidence that they have control over them” (1994). This is a goal that I have for all of my students, and below, I will consider how I attempted to facilitate mastery experiences for all my students in order to increase their sense of self-efficacy.