WTS 1 and 2 page 1 of 24

Personalized Learning in Special Education

Jessica Leu
Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 1 and 2
EDUW 691 Professional Skills Development
Caroline Hickethier, Instructor
August 14, 2017
 WTS 1 and 2 page 2 of 24

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 1: Teachers know the subjects they are teaching.

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the disciplines

she or he teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter

meaningful for pupils.

Knowledge. The teacher understands major concepts, assumptions, debates, processes of

inquiry, and ways of knowing that are central to the discipline(s) s/he teaches.
Dispositions. The teacher realizes that subject matter knowledge is not a fixed body of

facts but is complex and ever-evolving. S/he seeks to keep abreast of new ideas and

understandings in the field.

Performances. The teacher can create interdisciplinary learning experiences that

encourage students to integrate knowledge, skills, and methods of inquiry from several subject

areas.

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 2: Teachers know how children grow.

The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and provides instruction

that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.

Knowledge. The teacher understands how learning occurs-how students construct

knowledge, acquire skills, and develop habits of mind-and knows how to use instructional

strategies that promote student learning for a wide range of student abilities.
Dispositions. The teacher appreciates individual variation within each area of

development, shows respect for the diverse talents of all learners, and is committed to help them

develop self-confidence and competence.

Performances. The teacher stimulates student reflection on prior knowledge and links

new ideas to already familiar ideas, making connections to students’ experiences, providing
 WTS 1 and 2 page 3 of 24

opportunities for active engagement, manipulation, and testing of ideas and materials, and

encouraging students to assume responsibility for shaping their learning tasks.

Danielson Domains
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
Component 1c: Selecting Instructional Goals
Values
Clarity
Suitability for diverse students
Balance
Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
Learning activities
Instructional materials and resources
Instructional groups
Lesson and unit structure
Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning
Congruence with instructional goals
Criteria and standards
Use for planning

Domain 3: Instruction
Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
Representation of content
Activities and assignments
Activities and assignments
Grouping of students
Instructional materials and resources
Structure and pacing
Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness
Lesson adjustment
Response to students
Persistence
Pre-assessments
Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
As a special education teacher, I have a very important role in the education of the

students on my caseload. Wisconsin Teaching Standard (WTS) 1 focuses on the idea that

teachers know the subjects they are teaching. This is especially important for me, as I then have

to take the general education curriculum and modify it to meet the needs of the students with

whom I am working. My goal in this area is to find new and relevant curriculum and activities
 WTS 1 and 2 page 4 of 24

that engage students in their learning and motivate them to grow as much as possible throughout

a school year. I will continue to work on my understanding of “the central concepts, tools of

inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s)” I teach to “create learning experiences that make

these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students.” With multiple students on my caseload

at each grade-level, it is crucial that I adapt and create new learning opportunities for students at

all levels and abilities. This leads me to my focus for WTS 2 emphasizing that teachers know

how children grow. This requires a constant evaluation of “how children with broad ranges of

ability learn and develop.” By doing so I will be able to “provide instruction that supports their

intellectual, social, and personal development.” In my special education classroom, I have

students come in with a wide variety of abilities and needs. I have to know these abilities, be able

to provide them with learning activities that best meet their needs, and provide them with

opportunities to grow. Within these two standards, I hope to continue to enhance my teaching in

ways that will provide the best learning environment and curriculum for all students to succeed.
I chose three descriptors for both WTS 1 and WTS 2 to guide my research process. For

WTS 1 I chose to focus on the knowledge descriptor that state that “the teacher understands

major concepts, assumptions, debates, processes of inquiry, and ways of knowing that are central

to the discipline(s) s/he teaches.” I chose this descriptor because it is important for me to know

the content I expect my students to gain knowledge in, so I can better help design instruction to

meet their needs. I chose, from WTS 2 the knowledge descriptor asserting, “The teacher

understands how learning occurs-how students construct knowledge, acquire skills, and develop

habits of mind-and knows how to use instructional strategies that promote student learning for a

wide range of student abilities.” This descriptor demonstrates that I am able to assess how each

student learns and what their ability level is and construct learning opportunities to meet their

needs. This is especially important for special education students, as they have a wide range of
 WTS 1 and 2 page 5 of 24

abilities that may not be typical of their same age peers. Knowing that children grow and learn

differently will be key in providing appropriate education to all students.

I chose two disposition descriptors, one from WTS 1 and the other from WTS 2. The

WTS 1 disposition descriptor conveys the ability for the teacher to “realize that subject matter

knowledge is not a fixed body of facts but is complex and ever-evolving. S/he seeks to keep

abreast of new ideas and understandings in the field.” As teachers, we need to be lifelong

learners and be willing to keep up with current findings and strategies to, best educate the

students we work with. I strive to stay current in all content areas so that I can educate my

students with the most up to date information. Children are unique in their own way, which

leads me to the WTS 2 disposition descriptor I chose. “The teacher appreciates individual

variation within each area of development, shows respect for the diverse talents of all learners,

and is committed to help them develop self-confidence and competence.” Students come to

school from all different backgrounds, with a variety of differing experiences, interests, and

skills. Embracing those differences and capitalizing on the strengths of each student is what I try

to attain each day.

Finally, I chose two performance descriptors for WTS 1 and WTS 2. These descriptors

are especially important to the content in which I am researching. The first descriptor I chose

was from WTS 1 and is as follows: “The teacher can create interdisciplinary learning

experiences that encourage students to integrate knowledge, skills, and methods of inquiry from

several subject areas.” With the ideas of a personalized learning program, I need to be able to

create and facilitate unique learning opportunities for students. Integrating multiple subject areas

can help students to see how content relates and is important to have a balance of learning

opportunities. The WTS 2 performance descriptor states “the teacher stimulates student

reflection on prior knowledge and links new ideas to already familiar ideas, making connections
 WTS 1 and 2 page 6 of 24

to students’ experiences, providing opportunities for active engagement, manipulation, and

testing of ideas and materials, and encouraging students to assume responsibility for shaping

their learning tasks.” The personalization of lessons lead to what the descriptor is saying,

building on previous knowledge and skills to create new learning in a variety of content areas.

Students will be more engaged in the learning activities if they have prior knowledge and are

able to connect with the content in some way. My goal is to build on what my students already

know to create relevant and engaging learning opportunities.

I have 22 students on my caseload; the majority of them are identified as having an

Emotional Behavioral Disability (EBD). I also have students identified with Other Health

Impairment (OHI), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Learning Disability (LD), Significant

Developmental Delay (SDD), and Speech and Language Impairment (SLI). With this wide

variety of students ranging from Kindergarten to fifth grade, I have to evaluate their learning

environment and success to determine what is best for all students.

Assessment of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
During the 2016-17 school year, four students on my caseload were not achieving success

in the general education classroom and curriculum. Their behaviors were interfering with their

ability to learn as well as their classmate’s ability to learn. I began designing a personalized

learning environment for these students in hopes that they would be successful in driving their

education and having more input on the materials they learn about and the activities they

complete. The students were from different grade levels, so I used their STAR assessment scores

to determine the students I wanted to work with as well as overall classroom performance. I had

one student in first grade, one student in second grade and two students in fourth grade with

whom I began in a personalized learning program. For the purposes of this paper to protect

confidentiality, I will call the first grade student: student one, the second grade student: student

two, and the two fourth grade students: student three and student four. Student one was well
 WTS 1 and 2 page 7 of 24

below grade level coming into first grade, not knowing letter names and sounds making it

difficult for her to keep up in the classroom. Student one was not able to read well enough to

take the STAR Reading test, and took the STAR Math test in January with a 0.3 grade equivalent.

We were concerned that student one was not ready for the first grade curriculum entirely and

would benefit from different programming. Physical aggression was also becoming a significant

problem for student one. Student two had the academic skills, but was often unwilling to

complete work in order to assess accurately. The STAR scores from September to January

showed that student two made little to no growth in both reading and math. From September to

January STAR Math stayed at a 2.1 grade equivalent, and STAR Reading went from a 2.1 to a

2.2. The reasoning for an alternative environment for student two was the lack of progress and

providing opportunities to complete work of interest as well as skill level. Student three and four

are very bright academically. Their behaviors were often a result of boredom in the classroom.

My goal for these two students was to provide them with curriculum and activities that would

meet them where they are at and advance them into more challenging content. Student three

went from a 5.1 to a 5.5 grade equivalent for STAR Math and from a 4.5 to a 5.5 for STAR

Reading. Student 4 went from a 5.4 to a 5.1 grade equivalent in both STAR Reading and STAR

Math. This was a decrease in both, which was of high concern with the knowledge and potential

of that student. These students have their own background story and need for an alternative

educational environment, but I needed to do what was best for these students and will continue to

do so. I have implemented the personalized learning program in my classroom for one semester,

have seen growth, and am excited to continue this program with improvements to continue

enhancing the education of the students with whom I work.

Assessment of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
 WTS 1 and 2 page 8 of 24

All the students on my caseload were fully included into the classroom at the beginning

of the 2016-17 school year. Each one of the classrooms runs a bit differently and usually the

outcome is dependent on the relationship the teacher has formed with the student. Some students

were not achieving success in the general education classroom. For these students, I created a

personalized learning environment.

My classroom has different stations in which students could work in. I have study carrels

for four of the students who are in my classroom at all times, participating in a personalized

curriculum. I have a space where students can do small group work and a space to do small

group instruction. I have a carpet space where we all gather for morning meeting or for

important announcements and discussions. My room is also unique because, while I have four

students who are in my classroom full time, I have 18 students on my caseload that need me to

provide them services as well. When other students come into my classroom to work or for a

lesson, I am able to provide them with instruction or help with an assignment before they return

to their classroom. Students are in and out of my classroom all day long. This can be good for

socialization for the students always in my classroom, but can also be very distracting with the

constant flow of traffic in and out of the room. I have one paraprofessional in my classroom at

all times to help with both the personalized learning students and the students who come and go

from the room. The environment is a work in progress and continues to change as the needs of

students change.
Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research
The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment

assessment show that I have a diverse group of students and need to determine the best approach

to use to maximize the potential each student has to achieve success. The personalized learning

approach that I have taken this past school year is just a start to improving the education of the

students with whom I work. One thing that is driving my research is the use of technology in the
 WTS 1 and 2 page 9 of 24

personalized learning environment. As I tried to implement the program with four students this

past year, I used some technology and am looking to see what research there is out there about

the role technology plays in that setting and what it means to truly, personalize learning. This led

me to my research question of: “How can I use technology and personalized learning in a K-5

special education classroom?” This question stems from WTS 1 where I can “create learning

experiences that make…subject matter meaningful for students.” I will also be able to “provide

instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development” as stated in WTS 2.

Personalized learning is a buzzing topic in education today and having experienced with it for

half a year makes me quite intrigued to learn more. My goal is to establish an improved plan for

implementation of personalized learning with the use of technology as a support.

Research Summary
Personalized learning is a very student-centered approach to education. The goal is to

have students learning at their own pace by using strategies and resources that appeal to each

student’s individual interests and strengths. There are different ways in which we can

accomplish this in the K-5 educational system.

Personalized learning is “tailoring learning for each learner’s interest, strengths, and

needs. This approach encourages flexibility to support mastery and enables learners to influence

how, what, when, and where they learn” (Patrick, Kennedy, and Powell, 2013, as cited by

Basham et al. 2016, p. 127). To personalize learning there needs to be a change in the way

teachers and students view instruction. It transfers much of the learning opportunities from

teacher directives to student interest-driven accountability. This gives the students ownership of

their learning and provides them the opportunity to learn about topics that are of interest to them.

Each student is unique and has a wide variety of skills, interests and strengths. By personalizing

their instruction, all of these factors play a key role in providing an education to maximize

student growth (Basham et al. 2016). For a personalized learning program to work, both students
 WTS 1 and 2 page 10 of 24

and teachers need to switch their mindsets from what a traditional classroom looks and feels like.

Teachers need to be able to let go of some of the control for students to be able to take initiative

and drive their own learning. This requires the “explicit teaching of self-regulatory behavior”

(Dembo &Eaton, 2000 as cited in Basham et al. 2016, p. 128). Students need to have instruction

in how to regulate their learning and their environment to maximize their potential. This is

especially important because students need to be able to create goals and collaborate with the

teacher to determine the process in which they will achieve these goals. There needs to be a

sense of self-motivation for students to excel in a personalized learning environment.

Student grouping by age is more effective than by grade level by creating an environment

that is accepting of all abilities (Basham et al., 2016). As we know, students within each grade

level have a wide variety of abilities. Providing a safe space where students are working on their

own plan that is designed to fit their individual strengths and interests is the goal for personalized

learning. It takes the comparison to one another pressure off, and puts more of an emphasis on

individual growth and success. In a study done in 2016 by Basham et al. in conjunction with an

urban reform district, they determined that within the 18-month span of the experiment with

personalized learning students with disabilities were successful and, at times, even flourished in

this type of environment. That data showed that students with disabilities versus students

without did not change the amount of growth they made significantly. There is a small variance

with this data because of the low percentage of students with disabilities to begin with: about

12%. The data suggests that due to the flexible curriculum and learning environment students

participating in a personalized learning environment were able to grow at a substantial rate

regardless of whether they had a disability or not.

The terms most closely related to personalized learning include: (a) differentiation, (b)

Universal Design for Learning (UDL), (c) digital learning, (d) individualization, and (e) blended
 WTS 1 and 2 page 11 of 24

learning. While these topics are similar in ways, they are very different. Too often they are used

interchangeably, especially the ideas of differentiation, individualization, and personalization.

Jason Green (2017) clarified the difference between the three by suggesting that when you

personalize learning you bring the focus to the student by making the environment “more

student-centered” thereby increasing “student agency” (p. 52). Bringing the ownership and

accountability to the students provides them a structure that enhances their ability to set goals,

problem solve, and guide their own learning. While providing differentiated instruction or even

individualized instruction, the focus is taking the content being taught to all students and

changing it to meet the needs of one individual or a group of students. By doing this, the

directives are still teacher driven and less focused on student input (Green 2017).
Getting students engaged in what they are learning is critical in all learning environments,

but especially those in which the student is responsible for driving their learning. Larry Ferlazzo

(2017) credited research from Ryan and Deci (2000) that there are four main elements for getting

students engaged: (a) autonomy, (b) competence, or self-efficacy, (c) relatedness, and (d)

relevance. Each of these elements can be achieved through a variety of ways, with the use of

technology and without. Ferlazzo (2017) based on the research further asserted:
When autonomy, self-efficacy, relatedness, and relevance are combined, they have a

cumulative, synergistic effect. Students feel that they have (and in fact they do have)

more power to proactively determine their life paths. This sense of agency, in turn,

increases the likelihood that they will be able to transfer what they learn to other contexts

—and will feel that at least some of the work they do in school matters outside the school

walls. (Ferlazzo, 2017, p.30)

The transferring of skills to different context is a skill that can be difficult for students to

accomplish. With every skill students are taught, the goal is to have them acquire a skill that can

be useful to them in their lives not just to remember for a test. Getting students engaged and
 WTS 1 and 2 page 12 of 24

interested first is a priority for teaching new skills. Ferlazzo goes on to give examples of

techniques he uses to promote each of the four elements of engagement with strategies using

technology and without the use of technology. Offering choices to students in a variety of

different ways including: (a) organizational- classroom rules, (b) procedural- topic or

presentations style, and (c) cognitive- higher level thinking or justifying (Ferlazzo, 2017). The

use of technology can greatly influence the engagement of students, but there is a caution shared

by Ferlazzo on only using technology. The importance of feedback provided to students can be

lost with the use of technology. It takes out the interaction between the teacher and the student,

so the teacher is not able to provide direct feedback related to the task the student is working on.

It makes it difficult for students to know what they are doing well at and what they need to work

on to continue improving (Ferlazzo, 2017). Regardless of the age of the students or their ability

level, students need to feel that what they are learning and doing at school means something,

whether it be about something they like, will help them in the future, or connects to something

they have already experienced. These connections and explorations are critical for students with

disabilities as well. If technology is something that interests them and will help them to enhance

their learning, students should use it as a tool to support their growth. If it will hinder their

learning and/or become a crutch that they are dependent on, it will be more difficult for them to

transfer the skills into different settings. There needs to be a balance in a special education

classroom.
Research Implications
The question guiding my research was “How can I use technology and personalized

learning in a K-5 special education classroom?” Through the exploration of this topic, I have

found that much of the plan and implementation of the personalized learning approach stems

from student engagement. Without the students input and taking ownership, it will be difficult to
 WTS 1 and 2 page 13 of 24

implement personalized learned to its full potential. Student engagement is also a critical piece,

something we can overlook at times, and that can simply be asking students for their opinions or

what they are interested in. If students feel safe and respected their willingness to participate in

uncomfortable situations will increase. To implement a program like this takes a lot of

forethought and planning. Students will be just as uncomfortable as the teacher is to begin with.

It is important to work through it with a group of students and trust in the process to make the

impact it can.
Technology as a whole, based on the research I conducted, is most productive if used as a

tool to support learning, but not as the only tool. I found that to be true with my students this

year. Some were able to thrive with technology, while others used it as a toy instead of a tool for

learning. There needs to be a balance for students, clear expectations on what technology is for,

and training on how to use different technology appropriately.

Using this research, I hope that I can better implement a personalized learning program

with the use of appropriate technology for the students with whom I work. I know that not all

technology programs are appropriate for all grade levels so I will be aware of that when I select

learning tools. Knowing the difference between personalizing learning and differentiating

learning will help to put a plan in place that truly designs learning for a specific student and their

individual strengths, interests, and needs.

Research-based Action Plan
Action Plan Summary Outline
1. Design personalized learning plans and instruction for students on my caseload using

appropriate technology.
2. Envision the delivery of personalized instruction with technology supports in my

classroom this summer.

3. Assess and improve lesson plan from assessing the envisioned delivery.
Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
 WTS 1 and 2 page 14 of 24

1. Standardized goal: IEP goal stating: “Student one will make at least one year grade

equivalent improvement as measured by the STAR Math and STAR Reading assessments in the

2017-18 school year.”

2. Targeted learning objective: Same

Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)

1. Task: Participate and complete “must do” work in personalized learning plan to

improve academic skills in Reading, Math, and Writing specifically.

2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)

a. Meet weekly goals established collaboratively with student and teacher

b. Complete assessments for and of learning as specified on personalized

learning plan.

Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s)

1. STAR Math and STAR Reading assessments three times per year- September,

January, and May.

2. District assessments related to math, reading, and writing, such as on demand

writing assessments, unit tests, and AIMSweb benchmarking assessments.

Post-assessments
Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
I believe that continuing to implement a personalized learning program in my classroom

for my students will be beneficial for them. I want to incorporate their input and interests at the

beginning to give them ownership in their learning and provide them with the best chance to be

successful in school. This approach is very student-centered, will improve their willingness to

work, and directly relates to their personal interests and experiences.

Having experimented with this approach last semester I had an idea of how I wanted to

change things to make it run more smoothly and effectively. The research I did validated those
 WTS 1 and 2 page 15 of 24

ideas and provided me with even more to try. One challenge I am having is the long-term plan

for each student. I think that will come together as the year progresses, I want to provide

educational opportunities that best meet the needs of each student; therefore it will always be

changing. It requires a change in mindset to prepare unique and relevant lessons and activities

for each student individually. It will be a lot of work on the front end, but will be worth the time

and effort in the end.

I have created a template for students to follow as the personalized learning plan. See

Artifact A. It is a weekly plan, but can always be adapted and changed based on how quickly

students work through their content. On Mondays, I will meet with each student to go over their

plan for the week and to establish two or three goals for the day and/or week. We will

collaborate to determine what an appropriate and timely goal would be for the week. There are

certain tasks that are required for all students to do based on the district-mandated curriculum.

Those are listed under the “must-do” for the week. Students have the opportunity to work on any

academic task they choose, as long as they complete the “must-do” by the end of the week or

have met their goal. There is also a list of “can-do” activities students have the option of doing

to enhance their learning. I plan to incorporate a personalized learning program for all the

students on my caseload in some capacity by offering them a choice in regards to their education.

Eventually, my hope is that the classroom teachers also implement a personalized learning

system so that we can work together to ensure a positive learning experience is had by all.

Artifact B is an example schedule for students to follow if they choose to. Some students will

use this as a guide as they lack the ability to drive their learning enough to determine what task

to complete at what time. The only things that stay scheduled are morning meeting and special

classes, everything else can be done in a different order if they choose.

Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
 WTS 1 and 2 page 16 of 24

With personalized learning, and my plan for improvement I believe my students will

make great gains in both math and reading, as well as motivation and all around academic and

social skills. The four students I worked with this past school year all made some progress and

some made significant progress. Student one went from a 0.3 grade equivalent to a 1.2 grade

equivalent on the STAR Math assessment. This is still not at grade level, but a significant

improvement. STAR Reading was still not assessable based on the reading skills, but student

one is now able to identify all letter names, sounds, and read pre-primer and primer sight word

lists with 80% accuracy. Student two made some growth by scoring a 2.3 grade equivalent in

Math from a 2.1 and a 2.9 in reading from a 2.2 grade equivalent. Student three made great

progress, especially in reading by improving from a 5.5 grade equivalent to a 6.5. STAR Math

score for student three went up from a 5.5 to a 6.0 grade equivalent. This data shows me that

these students benefited from this type of instruction and were able to make gains academically

and behaviorally.
Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
My classroom environment will be similar to how it was ending last year, with some

structural changes. There will be two teachers and one paraprofessional to instruct the 15 to 20

students in the room at any given time. There will still be stations in which students can work

independently as well as stations that they can work collaboratively or with small groups for

instruction. There will be less commotion of students coming in and out as well, because there

will be a separate space for students to go where they can get help with work or for instruction

by me or another teacher. I think this will help the students stay focused and be able to take their

personalized learning plan into the classroom with them to continue their progress towards

meeting their goals. I will not have all the students on my caseload in my classroom at all times.
 WTS 1 and 2 page 17 of 24

My goal is to collaborate with the classroom teachers in order to incorporate personalized

learning aspects into their classroom as well to help students succeed.

Reflection of Entire Learning Process
The essential question I used to guide my research was, “How can I use technology and

personalized learning in a K-5 special education classroom?” While envisioning my

implementation based on my research, I think this will positively affect my students’ growth and

achievement. I determined that with a student-centered approach to teaching and learning with

highly engaging activities is most beneficial for all students, but especially those students with

disabilities.
What Worked or should work and Why
1. Personalizing an instructional plan to meet the needs of each individual student.
2. Involving each student into the decision-making process for learning tasks.
3. Setting attainable goals and making a plan to achieve those goals.
4. Incorporating inquiry-based learning experiences through “Genius Hour” projects.
What Did Not Work or may not work and Why
1. Student driven learning objectives, if the student is lacking the confidence or

motivation to complete work independently without structure.

2. Students becoming dependent on technology, and/or using it as a toy not a tool for

learning.
My Next Steps
1. Create personalized learning plans for each student to begin the school year.
2. Plan and implement a personalized learning program with my students in my

classroom, giving them the opportunity to take ownership of the space and materials they need to

create a positive learning experience.

3. Assess and evaluate student growth and progress towards weekly and long-term goals

and help them process through how to enhance their progress moving forward.
4. Be flexible with ever-changing student behavior and mindset and adapt their learning

plan to meet their needs on any given day.

5. Reflect on what works well and what does not work as well and make a plan for

improvement consistently.
 WTS 1 and 2 page 18 of 24

References
Basham, J. D., Hall, T. E., Carter Jr., R. A., & Stahl, W. M. (2016). An Operationalized

Understanding of Personalized Learning. Journal Of Special Education Technology,

31(3), 126-136. doi:10.1177/0162643416660835

Ferlazzo, L. (2017). Student Engagement: Key to Personalized Learning. Educational

Leadership, 74(6), 28-33.

Green, J., Mahoney, S. (2017). Leading personalized learning: digital programs help meet the

needs of all students: using technology to individualize learning environments. District

Administration, (7). 52-53.

 WTS 1 and 2 page 19 of 24

Artifact A
Artifact A: Personalized Learning Plan template with examples of must do’s and can do’s

__________________ Personalized Learning Plan

___ Grade

Week of: SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
Math I can… Must do…
M T W R F  ___ Math book
guided lesson
 ___ Math
assignment
 ___ Rock Math
level
Math Fluency
Can do…
 Math game
 IXL
 iPad Math folder
 Frontrow.com
 Xtra Math
 Flashcards

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
M T W R F Read to Self I can… Must do…
Word Work  ___ Read book
Listen to Reading box (Daily)
 ___ Handwriting

Can do…
 Word sort
 Word game
 Word Work folders
 Listen to books
 Raz-kids
 Frontrow.com
 Epic

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

 WTS 1 and 2 page 20 of 24

Objective/Focus
Skill
M T W R F Science I can… Must do…
 ___ Read Science
book pages and fill
out graphic
organizer

Can do…
 World book
research
 National
Geographic online
 Research a topic

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
Writing I can… Must do…
M T W R F  ___ Write a letter
 ___ Writing
project

Can do…
 iPad Writing
folder
 Look in the
dictionary for
words you like and
write them in your
personal dictionary

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
 WTS 1 and 2 page 21 of 24

Skill
M T W R F Social Studies I can… Must do…
 ___ Read Social
Studies book
pages and fill out a
graphic organizer

Can do…
 World book
research
 Research a topic
 iPad-Stack the
states
 iPad-Stack the
countries

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
Genius Hour I can… Must do…
M T W R F  ___ Work on
project
presentation
 ___ Set the date to
present project

Can do…
 Research
 Decide how to
present the project
 WTS 1 and 2 page 22 of 24

SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
M T W R F ICE I can… Must do…
 ___ ICE guided
lesson

Can do…


SUBJECT Learning My Work Plan

Objective/Focus
Skill
Character lesson I can… Must do…
M T W R F  ___ Participate
during Morning
Meeting

Can do…
 Practice the
character daily
 Share the
character’s ideas
with others

Artifact B: Personalized Learning Schedule outline for student four

 WTS 1 and 2 page 23 of 24

Time A Day B Day C Day D Day E Day

8:00-8:30 Morning Music Morning Morning meeting Morning meeting
meeting 8:10-8:40 meeting
-review Or -review expectations -review
expectations Read -review -review goals expectations
-review goals expectations -character lesson -review goals
-character -review goals -character lesson
lesson -character
lesson
8:30-9:00 Snack & PE Snack & Snack & PE
Read aloud 8:40-9:10 Read aloud Read aloud 8:40-9:10
Brain break Brain break Brain break
leader leader leader
-Discuss plan -Discuss plan -Discuss plan for
for day for day day
9:00-9:30 Follow Work Snack & Follow Work Follow Work Plan Snack &
Plan Read aloud Plan *must do Read aloud
*must do Brain break *must do *technology Brain break
*technology -Discuss plan *technology *subject
*subject for day *subject -Discuss plan for
day
9:30- Recess Cursive Recess Recess Work plan
10:00 Work Plan
*must do
*technology
*subject
10:00- Math Math Math Math Math
10:30 -guided lesson -guided -guided lesson -guided lesson -guided lesson
lesson
10:25 Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break leader
leader leader leader leader
10:30- Math Fluency Math Fluency Tech Ed Math Fluency Math Fluency
11:15 *Xtra Math *Xtra Math 10:25-11:10 *Xtra Math *Xtra Math
*IXL Math *IXL Math *IXL Math *IXL Math
*iPad Math *iPad Math folder
folder
11:15- Lunch & Lunch & Lunch & Lunch & Recess Lunch & Recess
12:15 Recess Recess Recess
12:15- Calm Calm Calm Calm Classroom Calm Classroom
12:30 Classroom Classroom Classroom
12:30- ICE ICE ICE ICE ICE
1:00 -guided lesson -guided -guided lesson -guided lesson -guided lesson
lesson
12:55 Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break
leader leader leader leader leader
1:00-1:30 Writing Writing Writing Art Writing
 WTS 1 and 2 page 24 of 24

-guided -guided -guided 1:15-2:00 -guided lesson

lesson lesson Lesson *Scribble book
*Scribble *Scribble *Scribble *Writing project
book book book
*writing *iPad writing *Writing
project folder project
*write a letter
1:30-2:00 PE Work plan Music Library
1:30-2:00 *must do 1:30-2:00 1:30-2:00
*technology
*subject
2:05 Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break Brain break
leader leader leader leader leader
2:00-2:15 Work plan Recess Work plan Work plan Recess
*must do *must do *must do
*technology *technology *technology
*subject *subject *subject
2:15-3:00 Genius Hour Genius Hour Genius Hour Genius Hour Genius Hour
-project based -project based -project based -project based unit -project based unit
unit unit unit
3:00-3:15 -Reward goal -Reward goal -Reward goal -Reward goal -Reward goal
-Check out -Check out -Check out -Check out -Check out
-Dismiss -Dismiss -Dismiss -Dismiss -Dismiss