The "slider" metaphor is particularly powerful because it recognizes 
that the concepts at the end are in fact on a continuum. Volume knobs, 
frequency tuning, and other types of controls have the character: they 
are not binary, on-off devices, but offer ranges of control.  Material 
may be more or less concrete, more or less open-ended.  Ideally, the 
idea of sliders would identify concepts that are "orthogonal," that is, 
changes in one variable will not cause changes in the other. 

There are two, very significant weaknesses in application of the 
concept.  First, granted that each student requires different levels of 
each of the sliders, would the instructor be expected to create 
different materials for each student in a class?  Or would it be 
adequate to create ranges of materials to cover a spectrum of students.  
(As you add sliders, this becomes more difficult, because you realize 
that no two students meet the same criteria.)  It's unlikely that this 
process can be automated, because it requires a content expert to adapt 
the concepts. 

The second weakness, at least in higher education, is that some types of 
professional education require that the student be able to function at 
levels of abstraction or degrees of independence.  In our professional 
program for occupational therapists, we often find that students are 
very capable in the structured and concrete environment of lecture 
teaching, but when we begin to move to the more abstract and 
unstructured courses (which are designed to be so) that prepare the 
student for clinical practice, they cannot perform as well.  While it 
might be possible to add structure and concreteness to these courses, 
that would make them less preparatory for the clinical in which the 
students will soon have to function.


Denis Anson, MS, OTR
Director of Research and Development
Assistive Technology Research Institute
College Misericordia
301 Lake St.
Dallas, PA 18612
Phone: 570-674-6413
Fax: 570-674-8054 



Dave L Edyburn wrote:

> Let's consider a technology intervention that is loosely known as

> "sliders."

>

> The concept of a volume control slider is a useful metaphor for describing

> the supports and choices that are presented to students in a UDL

> environment. Tomlinson (1999), known for her work in differentiated

> instruction, uses the term "equalizers" to discuss the concept of a

> slider. 

>

> She envisions a number of equalizers that could be developed to control

> the level of challenge and support a student needs throughout the learning

> process. For example, what if teachers and learners could access sliders

> that would alter the nature of curriculum material along several types of

> continuums:

>

> Knowledge Representation/Ideas/Applications

>

> 	Concrete.....Abstract

>

> Solutions/Decisions/Approaches

>

> 	More Structured.....More Open

>

> Planning/Designing/Monitoring

>

> 	Less Independence.....Greater Independence

>

> Pace of Study

>

> 	Slower.....Quicker

>

> As most remedial instructors know, when a text is too abstract we try to

> find ways to make the ideas more concrete. The same is true when a student

> struggles with a task that is too open-ended, we try to adjust the

> difficulty by adding structure to assist in the problem solving process.

> What if all curriculum materials came with a digital slider that

> dynamically altered the material when a slider is pushed on a continuum to

> offer less or more support? Would such a tool help us address the academic

> diversity we routinely encounter in our classrooms or tutoring settings?

> Since the curriculum was designed to support diverse learners, is it

> possible to eliminate or reduce the time needed to provide curriculum

> modifications and accommodations? If such tools were available for

> everyone, is it possible to avoid the labeling of students as a

> prerequisite to providing them with appropriate instruction?

>

> The metaphor of a slider offers a powerful vision for UDL curriculum

> developers as they seek to engage students in academic content. The

> critical issue is how to make learning activities that have an adjustable

> level of challenge via a palette of supports. 

>

> I like to think about the instructional design challenge in this problem

> as "Goldilocks." You remember: Goldilocks and the Three Bears. Each time

> the bears came upon a new task, Baby Bear had to explore several options

> until he found the one that was "just right." Unfortunately, in learning

> environments, we have no way of knowing the optimal challenge level each

> learner needs. As a result, in a one-size-fits-all curriculum, a majority

> of students discover  that the task is not "just right" because some tasks

> are boring because they are too easy and some tasks are frustrating

> because they are too hard. For struggling readers, the task expectations

> are almost never "just right" to enable them to engage in the task.

>

> In this posting, I have sought to provide readers with a conceptual

> framework for understanding the UDL principle of engagement and the issue

> of how optimal challenge impacts learning. In my next posting I will

> provide information to bridge the theory of sliders/equalizers to

> practice. We will experience a real life slider that adjusts the cognitive

> difficulty of text!

>

> Reference

>

> Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the

> needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

>

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Technology and Literacy mailing list

> Technology at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/technology

>

>

>