Moderate Learning Difficulties: the term, Lesson Study and pedagogic implications.

Moderate Learning Difficulties: the term, Lesson Study and

pedagogic implications

Rationale for study  - pupils with moderate learning difficulties (MLD) represent the largest

proportion of those identified as having special educational needs in the school system,

 Neglected as a focus for educational initiatives.    - 25% of all pupils identified as having SEN at school action plus or with

Statements in ordinary and special schools Neglect attributed to several factors. – come disproportionately from families who experience socio-economic

disadvantage

– no well established advocacy or voluntary group dedicated to the interests of these pupils

– historic uncertainty about pupils with MLD : between those with severe intellectual disabilities and ‘normal’ pupils who are lower attaining

– =

Moderate learning difficulties:

1. Not low attainment – not severe intellectual disability2. Traditionally defined in IQ terms : 50/55-70 range3. Subject to much critique – ethnic / cultural bias/ use

of IQ; intelligence tests 4. Terminology changes/sensitivity: Mental deficiency,

Educational imbeciles, Feeble minded, Mild /moderate educational subnormal, Educational mentally retarded, Mild/moderate intellectual disability

5. Terms and meaning vary internationally 6. Socially constructed term – serving dominant interests7. Raises questions about : what is special education,

who needs it? 8. ‘Acid test’ of inclusion policies.

Definition of MLD: DfES, 2003 Pupils with moderate learning difficulties will have attainments significantly below expected levels in most areas of the curriculum, despite appropriate interventions. Their needs will not be able to be met by normal differentiation and the flexibilities of the National Curriculum.They should only be recorded as MLD if additional educational provision is being made to help them to access the curriculum.

Pupils with moderate learning difficulties have much greater difficulty than their peers in acquiring basic literacy and numeracy skills and in understanding concepts. They may also have associated speech and language delay, low self-esteem, low levels of concentration and under-developed social skills.” (

MLD definition and identification

Area Sub-area

Child functioning Significant low attainment in most areas of curriculum Literacy

numeracy

Other e.g. science

Much greater difficulty in understanding concepts

Verbal and non-verbal reasoning: verbal concepts

Speech and language delay Age level dependent

Low self esteem

Low level of concentration

Under-developed social skills

Environmental factors School attendance

Additional teaching programmes

MLD definition and identification: Child functioning

OptionsSignificant low attainment in most areas of curriculum

Numeracy / literacy 1 Centile cut off for standardised test (e.g. below 5th centile)

2 Teacher assessed level(e.g. defined level below expected level (varies according to age)

3 SAT level (test results) e.g. defined level below expected level (varies according to age)

Other e.g. science Similar options as above

Much greater difficulty in understanding concepts

Verbal and non-verbal reasoning: verbal concepts

1 Teacher assessment (year/class group referenced e.g. lowest 1-2 )

2 Cognitive ability tests (On CAT, WISC, BAS e.g. lowest 2-5 centile)

3 Dynamic assessment (teaching assessment; teacher assessment based on degree of gain in response to assistance)

Table 1: Crowther et al. (2001) system for defining MLD

Associated with Milder learning difficulties

More severe learning difficulties

No other significant difficulties

Significant emotional and behavioural difficulties

Significant sensory/medical difficulties

Concept map of themes in LEA definitions’ of MLD term  not use associated not SLD norterm difficulties SpLD

MLD specify cut-off

low low lowcognitive attainment attainmentability and ability cross

curriculum

DCSF (2010)

% of pupils with Statements/SA+ in each areas of SEN achieving level 4+ in Eng and Maths

% numbers

Specific LD 22.7 9,042

Moderate LD 11.1 19,480

Beh, Emot Soc D 36.2 12,116

Visual Impairment 52.5 652

3 prototypes (research on LA use) :

1. definitions in terms of low curriculum attainments (all / a number), with cut-offs specified and with associated areas of difficulties; 2. definitions in terms of low attainments AND cognitive abilities, with cut-offs specified, distinguished from severe and specific learning difficulties and with associated areas of difficulties; 3. not use MLD term.

Phase 1 research shows:

- Pupils identified by secondary schools as having MLD fall into 3 subgroups groups and illustrated (Ylonen and Norwich 2011):• Those with low attainment and low concept understanding and reasoning (model 1)• Those with low attainment only (model 2)• Identified as MLD but not with low attainment nor concept understanding/ reasoning (model 3).

These findings suggest that some pupils are identified as having MLD inappropriately (group 3), while for others ‘conceptual understanding and reasoning’ are not used as indicators of MLD.

BAS matrices and verbal similarities (reasoning) T-scores (%)

Score of under 30 = in the lowest 2% of age groupScore between 31-40 = in the lowest 2-16% of age groupScore between 41-50 = 17-50% Score of 51 and above = 50% + (above average)

BAS spelling and reading (literacy) standard scores (%)

Scores below 70 = in the lowest 2% of age groupScores between 70.5-85 = in the lowest 2-16%Scores between 85.5 and 100 = 17-50%Scores of 100.5 and above = 50% + (above average)

Is there a difference between MLD, low attainment and specific learning difficulties SpLD?

- depends on definition:

i. attainment only OR

ii. attainment AND cognitive ability

- MLD as general learning difficulty; SpLD as specific difficulty

- categoric versus dimensional (continuum position)

- dimensional with pragmatic cut offs

Specific

LD

General LD: MLD

Specific – general learning difficulties

Range of attainments

MLD low attaining average attaining high attaining

Uneven attainments

Even attainments

CUT OFFS?

Why use the term MLD? Is it a disability, like severe learning diffiuclties?Or is it just very low attainment?

- Raises dilemma about differentiating this group

1.If do we identify MLD as an area of SEN / disability?

Risks – negative labelling, false identification as disability/SEN 2. If do we not identify it as difficulty / disability

but as part of the continuum of attainment?

Risks – overlook rights / needs of some vulnerable pupils,

lose additional resources

3 options for resolving dilemma: 

1. Retain and specify MLD category as an area of SEN 

2. Abandon MLD as a SEN category: consider as very low attainment provide in terms of compensatory education / social inclusion framework.

  3. Abandon MLD for majority, redefine new tighter category of mild mixed difficulties for minority.

What positive difference does this make for teaching?

Is there a specific set of MLD relevant teaching strategies?

- Little research; what written suggests no MLD specific pedagogy teaching (Fletcher-Campbell, 2004)

- various teaching approaches relevant to MLD but also relevant to pupils with lower attainment

Continua of pedagogic strategies: - appropriate teaching as - intensification and more focussed extension - of general teaching approaches(Lewis and Norwich, 2004)

Model of teaching strategies (from phase 1 research)

• Broad pedagogic approach: – Pedagogic methods/assumptions– Activity based learning– Assessment for learning

• Input (multi-modal/sensory approaches)• Cognitive demand:

– Level/style (differentiation)– Memory/consolidation

• Motivational approaches• Learning relationships

– Grouping and peer support– Adult-pupil communication

• Working with additional adults

Pedagogic approaches

Generic intensified / SEN

Generic adapted/Low attaining to above average

Is there a specialist pedagogy for MLD?

Evaluation of phase 1 Lesson StudyProcesses: more than 90% of teachers agreed with

mostly/definitely • Novelty and practical relevance of LS makes you interested in 

lesson development for pupils with MLD•  wider awareness of LS process enhances confidence in 

teaching pupils with MLD•  LS provides micro-focus on learning of 1-2 students to enable 

greater depth of analysis•  participating teachers feel less threatened to scrutinise their 

teaching by focusing on pupil learning rather than evaluating teaching.

•  LS enables participating teachers to think  about themselves 

as innovators in their schools. 

Evaluation of phase 1 Lesson StudyOutcomes: more than 90% of teachers agreed with

mostly/definitely • more theoretical and practical knowledge about LS• more understanding about nature and complexity of the learning needs of pupils with MLD.

• increased capability to plan and differentiate in your teaching of pupils with MLD

• more confidence to try out novel teaching approaches in lessons

• LS process has improved the quality of planning of your teaching (not just how to refine specific lesson.)

Lesson Study methodology components:-developing ground rules for working in joint research mode,• using case pupils (small number of pupils around whom the development is focussed),• identifying what to learn and why; the research focus,• drawing on what has been learned already about this focus, • joint planning,• joint observation (data capture)• analysing and recording of what has been learned from case pupils and by researchers,• capturing and distilling practice / data (through using videos, stills and audios)• finding ways of helping others to learn from what has been learned (innovated, refined, modified),•creating an artefact to communicate this (e.g. powerpoint, video, coaching guide, etc.) and using it.

What do we know about focus on MLD that is relevant to Lesson Study developments?

Studies indicate :

1. weaker intellectual abilities; reasoning, problem solving, thinking skills etc.

2. weaker working memory: phonological, spatial, executive control

3. issues about self esteem, motivation and independent learning

Way forward: adopt research based ideas and practices to inform the review and planning aspects of Lesson Study- Thinking skills- Motivation strategies- Working memory supports

1. Thinking skills: National Curriculum thinking skills:

1. Information processing, e.g. sort and classify2. Reasoning e.g. draw inferences and make

deductions

3. Enquiry, e.g. ask relevant questions

4. Creative thinking, e.g. generate and extend idea

5. Evaluation, e.g. judge the value of what they read, hear and do

2. Motivation strategies

ARCS model (Keller)

Design guidelines for developing effective motivational strategies

Attention

Relevance

Confidence

Satisfaction

ATTENTION - perceptual arousal- inquiry arousal- variability /novelty

RELEVANCE - goal orientation- motive matching

CONFIDENCE - learning requirements- success opportunities- personal responsibility

SATISFACTION - intrinsic reinforcement- extrinsic rewards- equity

ARCS model: expectancy – value model

Motivational observation/interviewing schedule:

Based on areas arising from Motivation Survey based on ARCS

- Areas to be used for classroom observation and interview of pupils about their motivation

- focus on individual and/or group

- on project website

Working memory :

Working Memory and Learning: A Practical Guide for TeachersGathercole and Alloway Sage.

Working memory questionnaire for teachers

Strategies:1.Recognise working memory failures2.Evaluate the working demands of learning activities3.Reduce working memory loads if necessary4.Frequently repeat important information5.Encourage the use of memory aidsWorking memory guide on MLD LS website under resources

30

Using these research informed approach in your Lesson Study in your subject

• What opportunities are there in the lesson that you are focusing on in Lesson Study to  integrate teaching that promotes 

• Motivation strategies?• Thinking skills?• Monitor and use working memory strategies? 

Slide 3.7