Interview With Jace, A 21st Century, 3rd Grade Learner

Brain-Based Learning In today's 21st Century Classroom

Brain-based learning strategies have practical applications in today's digital classrooms. Thinking about how I could apply these strategies in my own instruction with 21st century learners, I must consider first, who those learners are, what they need, and how their brains operate (i.e. What Is Brain Based Learning?).

In order to develop necessary skills, we want learners to be constantly practicing the "4Cs" of communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking. In order to be brain-based learners, they must produce content, not just consume it passively. And "although technology isn't synonymous with 21st century learning, it IS an integral part of it, and it’s often the set of tools that makes this new approach to teaching and learning possible. The purpose of technology used in a 21st century classroom should be to connect students with their world and enable them learn from others and to share their own ideas. It should also be used to differentiate the curriculum so that students are learning on their own developmental levels and are able to pursue their unique interests and passions." (Watson, Cornerstone, 2012) Where brain based learning takes the lead, is by way of examining the science and biology of our minds, and thus, tailoring education towards the natural processes of the brain, making this form of learning then, far more effective and meaningful overall - as well as unique to the individual learner.

The fact is, that our brains are always developing new connections and changing. Contemporary learners, even the youngest ones, are moving at a fast pace, have shorter attention spans, the same bursts of energy they have always had, and yet possess dynamically adaptive minds that have cleverly evolved to utilize a multitude of technological devices (often simultaneously) and to process larger amounts of data, in smaller portions of time, then ever before. They have almost unlimited access to virtual resources, with a need surpassing all of those before, to be engaged in meaningful, participative, experiential tasks and brain-based, unique learning opportunities and challenges.

According to Caine & Caine, 1994, "Certain basic tenants about the brain can be applied in the classroom."

1. The brain needs multifaceted experiences (such as):

• multi sensory input & challenges (use of multiple senses)
• rewards and motivation, active and passive spaces
• memory (repetition & experiences linked to emotion)
• prior knowledge (connect learning to things already known)
• information presented, that follows frontal lobe development by age (from concrete to abstract)
• practice (practice talking, writing & developing to make learning permanent)
• stories (engage many areas of the brain: experiences, memories, ideas, actions, feelings all help develop sequencing & organizing process of the brain and emotional triggers which make what is learned, permanent)

2. The brain seeks patterns (so use of):

• graphic organizers help learners create a visual version of their learning, appealing to multiple senses and making long-lasting connections in structured way
• "Chunking" creates a filing system for delivering and storing content, grouping like material for students to better absorb and organize specific topics/lessons
• safety & space (rituals/classroom constants paired with flexibility, challenges & options)

3. The brain searches for meaning. "Relational memory occurs when students can relate new learning to something that has happened previously in their lives. Adding to patterns or maps previously stored and mastered makes learning much easier." (Willis, 2006).

As asserted by Sprenger (2010), "The Net Generation, more than any other, will be co-teachers in the classroom. It has always been important for students to become teachers in order to increase their memory of content, but today we have students who are quite capable of changing the way we look at education. Their facility with research, their unique ability to scan Web pages in seconds, and their superb use of tools to get the job done puts them in a league of their own. They are unafraid of the discovery process if they can use the equipment that has become part of their daily lives. These students insist on finding meaning and having fun. They have the ability to show us the way. Even our young students will show us their needs and their ways of connecting to curriculum. Some of these children may not be as experienced with computers and iPods as others, but they may be skilled at photography and other forms of visuals. We must be careful observers of our classrooms and look for opportunities to make curriculum more meaningful."

Some effective tools to make meaningful connections using brain based learning in the classroom might involve:

• using graphic organizers that allow section for posing questions such as "how can I use this information in my life?"
• using storytelling as a learning device, having peers listen and connect to one another's topic-based stories in small groups)
• using real-world examples from the learner's world and pop culture in lessons, use guest speakers and outdoor field trips that are relevant and provide real world experiences up close, allowing immediate personal, physical connections and appeal to multiple senses and learning styles
• allowing for online research, passive and active periods, and lesson choices or options that provide self-selection of resources that are meaningful to that individual learner

4. Stress effects learning (so teachers must provide environments of least stress by):

• creating a feeling of belonging through group work and a sense of being valued among peers and contributing to peer learning
• informing learners about how their brains work so that they are able to realize and report on what they need to help them to be more effective in their goals
• using rituals to provide sense of safety and security through consistency
• giving learners specific daily tasks-develop routine for classroom, rotating jobs such as attendance, activity prep, etc. so all learners have an opportunity to be tasked & have options
• post classroom expectations, targets, procedures, and daily lessons/agendas in same place everyday, in easy to view area, for learners to read aloud, copy to personal devices or notebooks, and make sure all learners know what to do, how and when to do it, to avoid future confusion, and/or misunderstandings.
• making music, art, storytelling, and technology part of the classroom environment to reduce stress, make positive sensory and emotional connections.

"Lowering stress increases learning. Stressed brains don't learn in the same way as brains that aren't stressed. Students who feel they excel in an area at school will feel better about themselves, and their brains will release chemicals that make them feel good, like dopamine and serotonin, rather than the stress chemical cortisol."(Sprenger, 2010)

5. The brain is social

One of the components of social intelligence as described by Goleman (2006) is social cognition—simply understanding how the social world works. In a classroom, this ability might include the following components:

• recognizing different social groups or cliques
• knowing classmates' close friends
• knowing how to make friends
• knowing how to show empathy
• having the ability to listen
• knowing when and how to show emotions
• recognizing an emotion being expressed facially and with gestures

Because prevalent technology use may defer physical interaction, learners must be provided with social opportunities and interactive engagement in the classroom, in order to meets their brains' need for this form of stimuli, which provides important development and growth over time. Some ways that teachers can facilitate this brain based learning, is through: grouped activities,pairing learners for projects, role playing, presentations, and open discussions that cover current events and items of mutual interest, community, and emotion among peers.

Basically, from the research I've reviewed, the outline of these five brain based learning premises I've explored above, and the specific strategies I've identified under each, I feel far more confident in the direction I am headed as far as personal teaching approach in the applications I will use for my own classroom based on scientifically originated brain based learning and student-centered pedagogy. I also have come to fully endorse the idea that "It's time for educators to join this unbelievably fast-paced digital age. The principles of brain research still apply, and technology enhances our ability to help students' brains grow. Although some of us digital dinosaurs may not feel that technology is compatible with our brains, it is compatible with our students' brains. Their brains have adapted quite well to the high-tech world, and although some of the brain changes have negative consequences, if we stay on top of things we can help our students succeed in today's world." (Sprenger, 2010)



SOURCES
What Does 21st Century Learning Look Like in An Elementary School? (2012) Cornerstone Online: 21st Century Schools, Ed News and Trends. Article by Angela Watson. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://thecornerstoneforteachers.com/2012/05/what-does-21st-century-learning-look-like-in-an-elementary-school.html

Brain-based Teaching in the Digital Age. (2010) Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marilee Sprenger. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Brain-Based-Teaching-in-the-Digital-Age.aspx

Goleman, D. (2006). Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships. New York, New York: Bantam Books (division of Random House)

Willis, J. (2006). Research-Based Strategies to Ignite Student Learning. (online draft/proposal) ASCD. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://www.caisca.org/event_info/115/Brain_Memory2.doc

Mind/Brain Learning Principles (excerpted from) Making Connections: Teaching and The Human Brain. (1994) Addison-Wesley. By Renate Nummela Caine and Geoffrey Caine. Retrieved on June 20, 2014, from http://www.mainesupportnetwork.org/handouts/pdf/Caine's.pdf

RESOURCES
21st Century Learning in Elementary Schools. (2013) Dreambox Learning Online. Article by Jessie Wooley-Wilson. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://www.dreambox.com/blog/21st-century-learning-in-elementary-schools

Daniel Goleman-Social Intelligence. (uploaded September 25, 2006) YouTube. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://youtu.be/nZskNGdP_zM

How Do You Measure People Skills: The Elusive Landscape of Social Intelligence. (2006) Slate Magazine Online. Paul Harris. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2006/11/how_do_you_measure_people_skills.html

The Nueroscience of Joyful Education: Engaging the Whole Child. (2007) Educational Leadership, Psychology Today Online. Judy Willis. Retrieved June 20, 2014, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/4141/the-neuroscience-joyful-education-judy-willis-md.pdf

Imaginary Challenge: Planning for ELL Inclusion in the Classroom

English Language Learner Action Plan: Incorporating Specific Cultural Groups & Educational Practices

IDEA Disability Mindmap

This is the neatest way to explore the remediation process as it pertains to all the fourteen categories of disabilities as identified by IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act).

To check it out here - be sure to scroll down to the bottom of the page, or feel free to view directly from the Mind42 online tool!

Special Education Interviews

Based on the recent interviews collected by three local professionals in the field of special education, for the area of the northeastern United States where I currently live, I can honestly say that even after only a few short conversations, I now feel that I have a far better understanding of the referral process for special education services (despite having already experienced this process, from the parent side of things, for the better part of the last seven years). Obtaining first-hand knowledge, shared by the "front line" for services, certainly alters ones perception and makes sense of concepts and "behind-the-scenes" inter-workings that I was not, and am not privy to as a non-educator myself. Here then is the information I collected from my interviews...

Teacher Participants

Interview 1 - Email - Special Educator, MS ed, S.D., 1st G - 6/1/14

Interview 2 - Phone - Special Educator, MS, ed, L.A., K-1G - 6/1/14

(friends living in same state, three towns apart)

Questions

Q. How do you identify a student for special education?

Q. What are the signs of a struggling student?

Q. Are there alternative methods of instruction tried out before referring a student for special education, and if so, what are they?

Q. What is the timeline like for these services and how often is the plan re-evaluated?

Q. How do you get parents involved in these interventions and services and to what extent do they have a say? (Of course I knew this one ;)

Summery of Responses

A struggling child at age 6/7 looks very different from a struggling child at 9/10 or even 11/12. At times it can be difficult to decipher whether the problem that a 6/7 year old is having is strictly developmental or if it is indicative of a larger problem.

Generally they look for trends. Is the child having difficulty with one particular type of processing, but ok in others? Are they having difficulty with memory? What is their recall of information like? short term? long term? What is their executive functioning ability? Can they organize a multi-step task or is that very difficult? What if they try adding visual cues? Does that help or is it still difficult? ...Sometimes at this age a referral may not lead to a qualification of services but it can give them lots of good information about how to instruct in a different or more effective manner.

So basically, as I came to understand, the process from a teacher's  POV goes something like this:

1. A child is struggling in a particular area or with a particular skill. They'd take a look at their instruction or approach. They'd add supports such as visual cues, kinesthetic movements, color coding. Academically, they may use different materials or differentiate the assignment to meet the student at their own level. They would attempt remediation.

2. They would begin to gather information about what is working and what is not. While the gathering of info may be informal, They'd begin to keep it consistently so if it's later needed to move forward, they'd already have good information to look back on about what they had tried and the level of success they found.

3. At this point of information gathering, they agreed that they would have initiated contact with the parent, shared their concerns, and gained input from the parent(s) to find out if there are shared concerns. Simultaneously, they say that they'd also check in with special area teachers to see if the difficulty is presenting in other situations & settings.

4. Next, they'd pull a team together. Depending on the particular issue, they may pull in a speech and language person, the occupational therapist, school psychologist, etc. They would share the information & approaches they had gathered and tried, and get feedback from others. (Like we do!) They would devise particular goals and a measurement tool to gauge whether or not the goal is met. Strategies would be set and a six week cycle would begin. The plan is called an early intervention plan (or similarly to IEP, an EIP for younger children). This plan is shared with the parent(s) and they are invited to attend the progress monitoring meetings. (Also same as IEP)

5. The EIP process continues through 6 week cycles. Depending on if the child is responding to the interventions, the goals can change or stay the same but with different strategies being implemented. Meetings take place every 6 weeks with the same team and any changes are communicated with parents.

6. Generally speaking, a child continues through about a year of EIP prior to being referred for special education. (I had no idea it took that long, but I guess I get why now...to be sure and check for progress or success of the interventions) In their collective experiences, the few children that had been referred for evaluation had EIPs throughout the previous school year and then continued to present with difficulties in the classrooms. (so the interventions were appropriate and were required further)

7. A child who continues to struggle, is eventually referred for evaluation. There is a form that is filled out to that effect. Both teachers use RTI model, so they explain there is quite a lot of paperwork for each case. They are required to ask for parental permission to evaluate the child. All tests that will be conducted are discussed with the parents ahead of time. Based on RTI, there is a lot of data collection needed and it is pulled from many different sources.

Evaluations may include:

• Educational testing to determine general intelligence and current levels of academic performance
• Physical and/or occupational therapy evaluation of fine and gross motor skills
• Social work or behavioral assessment
• Psychological or psychiatric evaluation
• Speech/language evaluation
• Hearing and vision examinations
• Medical exams (but only to diagnose a student’s needs)

8. Eventually, if the child is determined to need special education services, the team will reform to hold a PPT meeting and share the information with the parent(s) on outcome of evaluations and formulate an IEP (individualized education plan) to address (among other things):

• Present level of performance
• Annual goals and objectives
• Evaluation procedures
• Special education and related services
• Participation in regular education
• Settings, providers, dates, etc
• Length of the school day and year
• State and district-wide tests
• Transition goals and services

Psychologist Participant

Interview 3 - Phone - School Psychologist, DL, LCSW, PK-4G - 6/3/14 - (LEA)

Questions

Q. How is a student identified for a special education referral?

A. Either the teacher or parents may identify areas of concern and request my observations. I would then have a look at the instructional environment not in the classroom, what is working, what is not, and how student is responding to see if I can preliminarily find any barriers to interventions that may(or not) have already been tried, such as cognitive, emotional, psychological, etc.

Q. Who takes responsibility for the progress of the child before and after the referral?

A. A cooperative plan of action and formal intervention would be out in place between the school and parents if the teacher(s) and I, after a period of time and after documenting what what tried/any progress (or not), determine the problem cannot be controlled with simple classroom interventions. We'd then notify parents that we will be forming a pre-referral team based on the idea that their child may require special education services, and will need evaluation. We would get the parents consent for evaluations and we'd participate together in an EIP or early intervention planning team to set realistic goals, design appropriate instructional strategies, and progress-monitoring procedures or evaluations to be performed. This would be the same process for the most part, later during an IEP (before and after referral).

I would perform and participate in evaluations then, by comprehensively examining a student's cognitive ability - especially for students being considered for an (SLD) or specific learning disability. Depending on the circumstances, information about the students cognitive ability might include prior (or new) observations of the student during instruction, a historical review of the students academic progress and health history, interviews with parents and teachers, review of data reflecting the students RTI (response to interventions), standardized measurement tools (such as intelligence tests), and direct measurements of specific cognitive functions in related to certain academic skills. We basically try to get a full picture of the student by using multiple sources and ways to measure. Another way in which I would similarly evaluate a student, would be by looking at their overall academic, behavioral, emotional/psychological health as it related to concerns and factors that may impact school, performance and socialization. All of this data would be reported back to the cooperative team, to compare with the data they have also collected or contributed to, and to make collective decisions based on that information. In this way, the pre-referral/EIP and (later) referral/IEP teams, act in the same manner, sharing responsibility of the child's progress.

Q. What is the school administrator's directive for special education?

Since our school uses an RTI (response to intervention) model of early intervention for our elementary grades students, we have a specific guideline to follow in helping us to identify special needs early on. Because of this however, our administration is required by law, to provide "high-quality instruction" and "tiered, evidence-based intervention strategies" to meet individual student needs. So while the teachers and counselors like myself, might be the ones doing most if he "hands-on" student interaction/work with the child, the administration has to frequently monitor progress to make results-based decisions, which ultimately fall on them alone. Not only are they required to have general curriculum knowledge, but it is further tasked of them to know exactly what resources are available within the school and to solely authorize (or deny) those resources, and or seek outside resources as needed.

Q. What provisions are made for students identified for special education?

If after extensive evaluation, the EIP team determines the child is eligible for special education services, then a formal IEP team/meeting would be scheduled to go over the exact specifications/provisions for the child's future IEP (individualized education plan). The team that attends this meeting would be essentially the same for either team: myself (the school psychologist or counselor), the child's teacher(s) and parents, any appropriate specialists, outside invitees, and/or a special education teacher, the school nurse (if appropriate), and the school's vice principal.

The provisions made for a student identified for special education, under the IEP, will include:

• A summary of their strengths and weaknesses and information regarding their performance in the classroom and on formal assessments, and the reason he or she is receiving special education services.
• The dates of service under this document and the goals to be achieved. For most students, IEP goals are in place for one academic year.
• A statement of “special instructional factors” (such as the need for assistive technology, braille, or transition services). If the student requires any of the special instructional factors, they should be addressed in the IEP.
• (As Appropriate) A statement of special transportation needs.
• A statement of opportunities to participate in nonacademic and extracurricular activities with their non-disabled peers
• A statement of the frequency and method of reports of goal attainment for parents or guardians.
• Benchmark pages are included and focus on specific areas that need special education services (such as reading, math, PE, etc.). The benchmark pages include: Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP) statements, Measurable Annual Goals, Evaluations used to measure annual goals.
• A Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) if the student’s behavior is a concern.
• The statement of least restrictive environment (LRE) and signature of all members present at the meeting.

With the help of the entire team, I would carry out my responsibilities and commitments formed under the IEP (as would all team members), with mine specifically for the most part, involving ongoing observation, any needed counseling services or special groups guidance, providing a safe place and person (as needed), giving further evaluations (as needed) and interpreting those evaluations/their data at future meetings.

Q. What is the level of parent involvement in referral process and special education?

Parents should immediately report any concerns they have for their child to their child's teacher as soon as they notice them. They should, as the teacher does, document these issues and continue to communicate and work with the teacher in early intervention attempts. As the process goes on, parents can and should be an active member of the early intervention and IEP teams and help to create effective plans that work best to meet the needs of their child. They should then continue to support the team while always advocating for their child and as part of that, continuing to use good communication, documentation, and reporting.

And so It would seem, based on these interviews above, that the face of "special education" and the span of it's reach may have changed slightly over time, since IDEA (the federal individuals with disabilities education act) was instituted, but the basic structure of how children with special needs come to be identified and referred for services under IDEA, does not appear to have changed significantly since my oldest child was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome in second grade. It is still in it’s basic form, exactly this:

1. Recognition

2. Pre-referral

3. Referral for Special Education

4. Special Education Evaluation

5. Determined Eligibility

6. IEP Meeting/Formation

7. Implementation of the plan

8. Annual Re-evaluation

What has changed quite a lot, is the shifting models of intervention, and in the end, how those special education services a child becomes eligible for, are being delivered - and the excitingly dynamic nature of the ever-evolving inclusive classroom environment!

I think in particular, no one I spoke to, was thrilled with the RTI model that all of their schools had adopted under IDEA, but also felt that it worked and that it was an appropriate system to help identify students with areas of concern early on. I got the sense that they felt bogged down by documentation and over-emphasis of the child's weaknesses or problems rather than inclusively instructing all children based on strengths, and focusing time on developing newer, more all inclusive or innovative teaching techniques they were excited to see happening other places around the world. It seemed like the responses required to intervention, took every second of their time at that early age group, and that they wished they could find a way to do more than just observe, assess, and document, but weren't sure how to change the cycle and flip their class, while also making timely and appropriate referrals for children that they saw as needing added help and intervention.

I feel extremely sympathetic to what I what sensing in them, because as I explained already in the prior blog about the role of personalized learning in special education, In tomorrow’s world, I hope to see a more “inclusive-inclusive” classroom that ‘flips the script’ on all that we know. And that it because I feel so strongly, that what we know (regarding special needs, as well as traditional learners, and traditional classrooms), is that what we have going on currently - is not yet working for us!

I think if pioneers in the educational world (even individual teachers like the ones interviewed above) are innovative and team up with one another towards progress in this specific target area, then I think the future holds promise that eventually, we will see all of our global learners, as “special needs” in that each one requires a special education plan based on their own individual strengths, gifts, dreams, goals, and abilities. And we will find a way, to assess and deliver those needs, with focus on fairer guidelines, in which the concentration of content, will be on learning: processing and analyzing information - not just memorization of the data - but what that data means! We will find a way to flip around classrooms, utilize technology, engage students from diverse settings, into group collaboration, and see each child as full of potential for endless possibility - not limitations hindering progress.

Role of Personalized Learning In Special Education

In attempting to determine what role personalized learning plays in special education, currently and in the future, I would argue that they are one in the same. Or, at the very least, I would assert that these two educational constructs, are intrinsically linked by several undeniable commonalities. If in looking closely at each of our students, to identify each of their unique goals and strengths in our quest to provide more personalized learning opportunities for that individual, are we not also then, providing a sort of “special education?”

On that note, special educator, and Ph.d. Shari Butler arrives at this same idea in her online article, when she states “There is a great deal of discussion about personalized learning but what is it? Wikipedia defines it as “the tailoring of pedagogy, curriculum and learning environments to meet the needs and aspirations of individual learners. Typically technology is used to facilitate personalized learning environments.” I’ve heard others refer to it as “competency-based learning,” “adaptive learning,” “student centered learning” and “individualized learning.” While all of the aforementioned strategies support personalized learning, isn’t personalized learning a pedagogical philosophy that is not unlike special education?” (Butler, 2013)

In specialized learning, a teacher becomes the facilitator of student (or learner) directed learning rather than someone who stands at the head of class and lectures. In the specialized learning environment, students (or learners) are offered several different ways and paths to achieve and demonstrate learning based on individual abilities, strengths, needs and goals. Differentiation is incorporated automatically by inclusiveness of all students in whatever their capabilities, to participate in those learning opportunities, interact, and collaborate with one another. - Assessment is ideally focused on analyzing and evaluating information, rather than just memorizing facts.

But hmm…According to Wikipedia, “special education is the practice of educating students with special needs in a way that addresses their individual differences and needs. Ideally, this process involves the individually planned and systematically monitored arrangement of teaching procedures, adapted equipment and materials, accessible settings, and other interventions designed to help learners with special needs achieve a higher level of personal self-sufficiency and success in school and community than would be available if the student were only given access to a typical classroom education.” (Wikipedia, 2014) …Doesn’t it sound like we are talking about the same thing here?

So why is that? I believe it is because all special education is delivered on the basis of “individualized education plans” (or IEPs), meaning, that special education is reliant specialized learning principles in order to be carried out. And specialized learning is thus, a part of special education.

Okay, but then, if they are not completely the same thing, then how are they different? One primary difference is that in special education, an RTI (or response to intervention multilevel instruction method of evaluation for individual students) focuses on weaknesses and issues that might be wrong with children, and to what degree, in order to determine what interventions may or may not be needed to create the IEP for a child who has special needs.

In stark contrast, a personalized learning variation of the RTI model for assessment of individualized educational needs, aims at targeting instead, the strengths and goals of each AND EVERY learner. “The teacher uses interventions based on the learning goals right from the beginning of the learning process. The teacher designs learning strategies identified through the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) lens so interventions that may be needed can be identified earlier. When teachers understand each learner using their UDL lens and their strengths, interests, passions, standards, then learners take responsibility for their learning so they can acquire the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in their future. Teachers and learners work together so learners receive additional support before they fail. Failure is no longer an option under a Personalized Learning Environment.” (PersonalizeLearning, 2013)

This is how I see the intersection of personalized learning and special education today: Two very similar, inter-dependent (almost the same) ideations, with the same desired outcome, but entirely different initial approaches in getting there…In tomorrow’s world, I hope to see a more “inclusive-inclusive” classroom that ‘flips the script’ on all that we know, because what we know (regarding special needs, as well as traditional learners, and traditional classrooms), is that what we have going on currently, is not yet working for us. I think if pioneers in the educational world are innovative and team up with one another towards progress in this specific target area, then the future intersections of personalized learning and special education, will be that they do in fact merge into one - to create a super classroom experience for every child learner.

I think the future holds promise that eventually, we will see all of our global learners, as “special needs” in that each one requires a special education plan based on their own individual strengths, gifts, dreams, goals, and abilities. And we will find a way, to assess and deliver those needs, with focus on fairer guidelines, in which the concentration of content, will be on learning: processing and analyzing information - not just memorization of the data - but what that data means! We will find a way to flip around classrooms, utilize technology, engage students from diverse settings, into group collaboration, and see each child as full of potential, not limitations.

RESOURCES

Personalized Learning and Special Education. (2013) Pearson Research & Innovation Network. Shari Butler. Retrieved on June 5, 2014, from http://researchnetwork.pearson.com/nextgen-learning-and-assessment/personalized-learning-special-education

What Personalized Learning Really Means for Modern Teachers. (2013) Edudemic: Connecting Education & Technology. Jennifer Kelly. Retrieved on June 5, 2014, from http://www.edudemic.com/personalized-learning-for-teachers/

Revolutionizing Education with Personalized Learning: Jeremy Friedberg. (2012). TEDxYouth. YouTube. Retrieved June 5, 2014, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC-zBsc1w-c

Special Education. Wkipedia: The Free Ecyclopedia. (Last modified May 21, 2014) Retrieved on June 5, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_education

RTI in a Personalized Learning Environment. (2013) Personalize Learning: Transform Learning for All Learners. Retrieved on June 5, 2014, from http://www.personalizelearning.com/2013/05/rti-in-personalized-learning-environment.html

One Child At A Time: Custom Learning in The Digital Age. (2013) American Radio Works. Emily Hanford and Stephen Smith. Retrieved on June 5, 2014, from http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/personalized-learning/