APST 5 refers to the graduate teacher’s ability to assess and provide feedback to students. This means effectively reporting on student learning, providing appropriate feedback to student learning, making consistent and comparable judgements and interpreting and reporting on student achievement. A challenge has repeatedly arisen in assessing students with work avoidance issues – with one notable instance being an ASD, ODD student in a year 2 class with whom I have worked.
This boy was trialling various behavioural medications, but in the meantime was very loud, disruptive and obstinate. Teachers and aides were advised to let him read or draw if he was in a bad mood – and he would generally be happiest just penning pictures on a whiteboard. Trying to take the whiteboard away would almost always be met with an outburst, disrupting both the class and his peers. It is necessary for healthy development of ASD students that they be included in mainstream classroom activities (Lindsay, et al., 2014). With the mentor’s approval I sought to find a way to implement the whiteboard in this student’s learning, notably in his developing literacy which was at risk of falling behind. It was decided that we would give this student opportunities to draw out his responses to questions, and whenever possible, allow him to explain his drawings to us to demonstrate his understanding (5.4). The effectiveness of this was particularly evident during a phonics lesson investigating the ‘L’ sound, such as in ‘bell’ and ‘leg’. While most of the class was writing out words containing the sound, we allowed this student to draw things containing the sound. I would ask him to name each drawing out loud, after which I would write it down on a second white board and ask him to underline the letters that made the sound (5.1). He would almost always comply quickly, owing to the fact it was only a brief interruption to his drawing, (in this instance, the word is Koala). If he named an incorrect word, I would still write it down and ask him to point out the sound – as the error was still a fantastic opportunity for learning (5.2). I would never have him name too many words, as he still had very particular limits and could quickly get frustrated with being told what to do (5.5).
This method was repeated for subsequent phonics lessons, and has helped my mentor and me assess this student to a standard similar to that of his peers (5.3). This adjustment has applications for EAL/D students too, and indeed any student that has challenges or barriers to their writing ability.
