During the lesson "What Do Animals Need to Survive?", my primary goal was to provide all students- regardless of verbal ability or cognitive level- with access to content in ways that honored their individual communication modes and learning styles. I observed my students engaging in varying levels of support, which led me to reflect deeply on how to scaffold instruction more effectively. To reach this goal, I implemented multiple levels of scaffolding and modeling. For students requiring full physical prompting (Artifact 1 and 2), I modeled the use of PECs or AAC devices alongside tactile exploration of realia (ex: using a a dog bowl to represent food). For more independent students, such as Student S, I modeled how to use a PEC board to label needs, followed by guided prompts that gradually faded into independent responses. This deliberate scaffolding supported the development of communication skills, attention, and task comprehension.
Upon analyzing student work samples, I observed distinct performance patterns that informed my reflection and revisions. Student R (meeting the standard) benefited from minimal prompting, while Student V (approaching the standard) needed full support and showed inconsistent accuracy. While Student I, at risk, required full hand-over-hand prompting and displayed limited comprehension. These differences highlighted the importance of tailoring support levels and grouping strategies amongst stations. Student learning was assessed using performance-based tasks, direct observation, and ABA data collection sheets. (Artifacts 5-9).
To increase intellectual engagement, I revised the lesson to include station color cards that let students visually follow to each station. I increased engagement through sensory bins, sorting centers, and interactive technology. I also added "why" questions such as "why do fish need water?" to promote critical thinking.
Two culturally responsive teaching strategies for future implementation include: Integrating visuals or stories that reflect students' home cultures, such as images of pets or animals, or family meals. Items that are common in their community environments. Inviting students and families to share photos of their own pets or familiar animals to build personal connections and increase engagement.
Formative assessments would be revised to incldue both qualitative and quantitative data. In addition to prompting logs and discrete trial data (Artifact 5-8). I would now collect anecdotal notes on student affect, communication attempts, and preference for learning modalities. I would also introduce technology-supported assessments such as digital matching games to provide alternative means of expressive for nonverbal students.
These instructional refinements illustrate my growth in aligning data with decision-making, increasing access to academic content, and creating a learning environment rooted in equity, responsiveness, and reflection. By continually adapting instruction based on student work and performance data, I strive to imploy the principles outlined in AAQEP standards 1b-1g and 2b-2g, ensuring that all learners are seen, heard, and supported in their development.