are learning.
Big data and algorithms are not a part of any conversation regarding the personalized learning that we promote in this book or the schools and districts we highlight throughout this book that are using this approach. It is a philosophy and way of thinking for classroom teachers and is not intended to replace the teacher in any way.
It is important to note when studying personalized learning that there are many misconceptions and misunderstandings around this topic. In the following sections, we will describe in detail our view of this concept to ensure that all readers understand personalized learning as we envision and intend it.
The Five Elements of Personalized Learning
While working with groups of teachers implementing personalized learning, we reached a key turning point when we broke down the definition and understanding into smaller parts we call the five elements of personalized learning. These elements serve as the framework for the subsequent chapters in this book.
1. Knowing your learners
2. Allowing voice and choice
3. Implementing flexibility
4. Using data
5. Integrating technology
It is important to note that implementing one of these elements in isolation is not personalized learning. Typically, it takes combinations of the elements to come together to create personalized learning. Grouping students or rearranging furniture does not make a lesson personalized; however, it might be if you discover where students are in their learning with a preassessment and then establish opportunities for voice and choice by offering tiered learning activities to meet the learner at his or her level based on how he or she performed.
Teachers working in collaborative teams will be able to better address critical question 4 if they make it a regular part of their time together and frame their critical question 4 conversations around the five elements of personalized learning. In most cases, question 4 students have likely proven through various traditional methods that they are ready for extension by their performance in class. When this occurs, customization for the individual learner is just a natural fit as their learning needs to move beyond what the teacher intended and planned for every student. Personalized learning provides the framework and discussion starters for teams looking to determine what to do for this type of learner. It further encourages a classroom culture in which students are encouraged to stretch their learning, ingraining in students what Carol Dweck (2006) refers to as a growth mindset—a belief in the idea that intelligence can be developed rather than simply inherited. This philosophy and type of thinking goes beyond asking students to read quietly, help a struggling student, or just hang out while others get caught up. Personalized learning (and its five elements) is a wonderful tool to ensure question 4 students in every grade band from kindergarten through senior year are successfully extending their learning beyond the learning targets.
The Case for Personalized Learning
When leading conversations about why we advocate for personalized learning and its connection to question 4, we enjoy starting with a simple activity in which we ask participants to recall a time when they, as teachers, had students who were totally tuned out and unengaged with a lesson because they already knew the content, and a time when a student was ecstatic about and very engaged in what he or she was learning because the teacher respected what the student knew about the subject matter. For example, one author, Mark, remembers his first year of teaching eighth-grade American history. As perhaps many first-year teachers would, he wanted to follow the rules and be seen as a good teacher. Many of his units were geared around discussions and lecture about the textbook readings, which would typically be followed up with some sort of activity or simulation, and conclude with a type of assessment. There was one student who was an American Civil War enthusiast. When it came time for the units and activities around this topic, Mark didn’t quite know what to do with him. He would routinely interrupt the classroom conversations to share cool and interesting facts and bring in various artifacts he had collected. While the student was able to share his excitement and knowledge in some ways, there is no doubt that he was bored or at least not given an opportunity to shine or extend his learning. Looking back, we authors realize offering personalized learning opportunities based on the elements and strategies we feature in this book would have been far more valuable for this one student.
Think of a time when, as a teacher, a student you were working with was tuned out and unengaged with a lesson because he or she already knew the content.
We would argue that, like many question 4 students, Mark’s student played along with what the rest of the class was doing even though he personally didn’t get much out of it. He could have been far more engaged if his teacher had worked with a collaborative team that intentionally and deliberately planned for ways for him to extend his learning since he already knew the content. Perhaps this student could have presented on a certain battle or chosen an independent project to work on and develop over the three-week unit.
Conversely, we recall an example of heightened engagement when Mark was working with his son, who was learning about force and motion in his fourth-grade classroom. He had previously passed the classroom assessment, which covered the material during whole-group instruction. Not needing additional direct instruction, his son had the opportunity to extend his learning with an activity that was very similar to one done by sophomores in that district’s high school. The son brought home a balloon and said that by the end of the week, he needed to use household items to make a vehicle, and students would win prizes for the vehicles that went the farthest distance. The balloon would ultimately serve as the one energy source that would provide propulsion to the vehicle that he would be creating. For three days, the author watched his son perform various trial-and-error activities to get things just right. After using just the right aerodynamic box, pencils to serve as axles, and old CDs as wheels, the son proudly obtained a third-place finish out of about one hundred fourth graders who completed the activity. The boy profoundly commented, “I was just really proud of myself. I don’t know why. I want to do more of that kind of thing.” Interestingly, the next day, his kindergarten-age brother saw the excitement and energy in his older sibling and was busy making his own vehicle out of household items. Mark’s son was given an opportunity to show that he knew the material (which involves personalized learning elements of knowing learners and using data), was allowed to extend his learning, was given voice and choice in how he wanted to construct his vehicle (which involves voice and choice), used technology to generate ideas (which involves integrated technology), exercised a growth mindset as he went about multiple trial and errors to make sure his creation would be competitive (which involves flexibility), and got to share his final product in a competitive environment. If we can provide personalized learning opportunities like these to question 4 students, everyone wins.
Think of a time when a student you, as a teacher, were working with was excited and engaged with the content because he or she was allowed to extend his or her learning.
It’s likely that student you thought of in the preceding individual reflection was one who, when he or she was engaged, just worked—not because the student had to, but because he or she wanted to—and time passed quickly for the student. Learning didn’t just happen to this student; he or she took command of it. This is what researcher Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (2008) calls flow. Csikszentmihalyi (2008) finds that our best moments occur when we are completely absorbed in an activity,
