The objective of quality education for all is frequently discussed in the current era of curricular reform (Murdoch et al., 2021). As a result, in order to provide students with a high-quality educational experience, a suitable relationship is required, and the instructor takes on the role of a learning facilitator. These connections are described by academics as “educational interactions that help students to feel heard.” However, the initial intervention strategy did not include “listening.” Through the use of a platform called “Classdojo,” this revised intervention plan fosters relationships between teachers and parents, other peers, and students with disabilities. Therefore, “listening” will be a key intervention element in the redesigned intervention plan. The target audience in this instance has been changed from elementary school students to the group of students with impairments. This is due to the possibility that students in primary schools are more interested in playing than in studying, and the excessive use of electronic gadgets as a learning tool could harm their eyesight. On the other hand, students with disabilities must participate in high-quality education for all because they are a vulnerable group that is frequently disregarded. Parents’ worries about school safety can range widely because the disabled student population is frequently subject to prejudice and discrimination. For instance, they may worry that their child who has physical or sensory impairments is at risk of falling down stairs, in the playground, or somewhere else in the school, or that their child will be hurt by the teacher’s poor handling of them (Witt, 2004). In these situations, teachers—the group second in proximity to these disabled students after parents—should help pupils feel heard, in keeping with the first principle of listening instruction (Murdoch et al., 2021). At the same time, this intervention plan’s innovation is that the parents of the group of students with disabilities should also have the chance to be heard, in addition to the group of students with disabilities feeling heard. In this situation, Classdojo is a data-based educational intervention platform that enables the teacher to receive feedback from parents as well as the student’s “voice” by way of data transmission. The procedure and justification for this intervention programme are the main topics of the next section.

According to Whitehurst (2007), when deciding how to include the “voices” of persons who are marginalised or communicate in a different way, listening as a form of educational listening is a very successful strategy. Therefore, the intervention by Classdojo offers students with impairments the chance to speak up. Due to their humiliation, kids with impairments are hesitant to speak with or communicate with teachers (Hastings and Oakford, 2003). According to Kotera et al. (2022), an informal style of talking and listening can help the student population with disabilities relieve their stress and concerns, enabling them to speak up more. On the other hand, teachers who listen to students go above and beyond the idea of “giving pupils a voice,” or allowing them the chance to express their own opinions as individuals. In order to do this, it is necessary to create the appropriate environment and setting in which all students can have a positive emotional and cognitive experience. Teachers can recognise the distinctive contributions of children and work to develop learning contexts in the classroom that allow each student’s abilities to be revealed thanks to Classdojo’s “Messages” feature, which allows students and teachers to chat privately. By introducing humorous behaviour in the form of a cartoon sticker, Classdojo simultaneously allows groups of students with disabilities the chance to have an open discussion with their teachers. There is a crucial connection between this open listening and kids feeling heard. Such empathic listening in a classroom setting enables teachers to comprehend the expressive qualities of pupils who exhibit surprising, original, or even deviant behaviours that could be “filtered out” in evaluative listening (Hintz et al., 1994). Consequently, empathic listening enables groups of disabled students to feel “really listened to” and to sense a “special and deep appreciation” that they have never known. Students with disabilities will benefit immensely from this occurrence in terms of their sense of self-worth and belonging (ibid.). Furthermore, Nowicki and Sandieson’s (2002) study demonstrates that student groups with disabilities are frequently reluctant to initiate interactions with other peers. This is because they often feel uncomfortable doing so. Building personal relationships with students through empathic listening is a key competency for teachers to support each student in developing relationships with peers (Murdoch et al., 2021). Supportive listening is a type of teacher listening that describes what teachers do when they hear the ideas of several students over time, trying to make connections between these ideas in order to develop a positive relationship between students. By giving teachers with the substance of their chat data, Classdojo was able to enable them to hear and analyse the opinions of other pupils, enabling them to think and learn from viewpoints other than their own. Teachers are interested in uncovering what is unusual and defining, for instance, how one student’s views complement or even challenge another student to improve their knowledge or talents when they listen to students in this way.

The listening process aids in facilitating communication between two or more groups and exploring the possibility of collaboration, as stated by Ultra Red. The listening method is in line with educational intervention initiatives even though the organisation is largely focused on politics and inequities. By strengthening this base, for instance, the intervention program’s teachers will have more ability to foster a sense of community that will benefit both families and schools. Teachers are establishing a space where everyone, not only those participating in the power of the learning community, may have a voice by developing a community outside of the classroom (Spratt and Florian, 2014). Since Ultra Red adheres to the Listening Process, this educational intervention programme will be built on that. A group of individuals can benefit from the listening process in the early phases of an organisation by using it to identify themes and carry out a group inquiry (Ultra Red, 2011). Therefore, in order to give parents access to their child’s academic and physical status at school, teachers must first set up a “Class Story” through Classdojo. Additionally, teachers must set up a “Message” option with parents so that they can voice any expectations or worries they may have regarding their child’s schooling. Parents of kids with disabilities, who are more curious about how their child is doing at school, are more aware of this (Heward, 2003). Evidence also suggests that these worries are exacerbated for parents of students with poor communication abilities, as parents may worry that their children won’t be able to tell them or the school staff about injuries or bullying (Sciarra, 2004). In this instance, Classdojo worked well as a conduit between parents and instructors, providing parents a chance to be heard while also giving teachers a chance to consider these recommendations and worries. According to Ultra Red (2011), there should be an evaluation and response to the concerns and themes revealed after the first step of the listening process. As a result, teachers can use Classdojo to promptly inform parents about their child’s wellbeing and academic progress. This phenomena significantly enhances the openness and intimacy between teachers and parents. According to Ultra Red (2011), developing listening skills helps two disparate groups become more cohesive.

The usage of Classdojo as a data-based intervention is the main component of this intervention strategy. Teachers, students, parents, and schools are among the intended user groups that classDojo serves as an intermediary to bring together. The process of user engagement in the alleged value exchange places a strong priority on facilitating user interactions and managing user connections (Van Alstyne and Parker 2017). More specifically, each feature in ClassDojo is created for a particular user group while adding value to other user groups through this value exchange mechanism. Thus, ClassDojo encourages participation through design (Langley and Leyshon 2016). This phenomena clearly shows how using Classdojo as a platform for intervention projects enhances student-teacher interaction and family involvement. Williamson (2019), however, claims that Classdojo has gradually changed the social role of the teacher in the classroom and turned teaching into a set of mixed human-machine tasks. This implies that the subjective human teacher, by deferring to the machine’s objective calculations rather than using their own professional judgement, experience, and expertise, has in fact diminished their own social role. It is feasible to anticipate and predict the optimal course of action and then interfere in both by knowing more about the behaviours of groups of students with disabilities, their behaviour, and their reactions to events or policies. However, pedagogical listening also calls for a focus on the complete spectrum of human communication, which extends beyond speech to include facial expressions, gesticulations, body language, and all the other ways in which people exhibit social emotions (Murdoch, 2021). In this situation, Classdojo is handling the listening process in order to protect the students with disabilities from embarrassment. As a result, teachers might not be able to see for themselves how their pupils are acting, which could lead to some inaccurate assessments. Thus, data-based educational interventions may, in certain cases, prevent teachers from appropriately interpreting students’ intents when listening to them, which would reduce the effectiveness of the intervention programme. In order to lessen the restrictions associated with datafication, this intervention plan advises that the use of datafication as a medium should be supported by face-to-face communication and listening techniques with the student population and parents who have impairments. Additionally, datafication as an educational intervention must provide a theoretical framework for how formal learning might be more tailored, focused, or informal than other options (Kukulska-Hulme and Traxler, 2019). More specifically, content, communities, activities, tools, and communication should all be in line with the underlying theory offered as part of data-driven interventions. In this situation, before beginning an intervention programme, teachers must first agree on a syllabus alignment with students who have difficulties to ensure future efficacy. However, dealing with emerging technology, such as the usage of mobile devices, may be challenging for students with impairments. The widespread use of mobile devices, not just for consuming data, images, ideas, and opinions, but also for creating, sharing, and altering them, will demonstrate the effectiveness of datafication, for instance. Additionally, education itself is a co-creation. Therefore, when students with impairments find it difficult to comprehend the theoretical foundations created by teachers, remedial programmes may not be successful. On the other hand, teachers who are unable to assess the capacities of children with impairments through the creation of data may potentially dramatically reduce the effectiveness of intervention programmes.

Reference:

Gin, L. E., Guerrero, F. A., Cooper, K. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2020). Is active learning accessible? Exploring the process of providing accommodations to students with disabilities. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(4), 12.

Greene, M. (2000). Imagining futures: The public school and possibility. Journal of curriculum studies, 32(2), 267-280.

Hastings, R. P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational psychology, 23(1), 87-94.

Heward, W. L. (2003). Ten faulty notions about teaching and learning that hinder the effectiveness of special education. The journal of special education, 36(4), 186-205.

Kotera, Y., Green, P., & Sheffield, D. (2022). Positive psychology for mental wellbeing of UK therapeutic students: relationships with engagement, motivation, resilience and self-compassion. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 20(3), 1611-1626.

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2019). Design principles for learning with mobile devices. In Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 181-196). Routledge.

Langley, P., & Leyshon, A. (2016). Platform capitalism. The intermediation and.

Murdoch, D., English, A. R., Hintz, A., & Tyson, K. (2020). Feeling heard: Inclusive education, transformative learning, and productive struggle. Educational Theory, 70(5), 653-679.

Nowicki, E. A., & Sandieson, R. (2002). A meta-analysis of school-age children’s attitudes towards persons with physical or intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49(3), 243-265.

Spratt, J., & Florian, L. (2014). Developing and using a framework for gauging the use of inclusive pedagogy by new and experienced teachers. In Measuring inclusive education. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Van Alstyne, M., & Parker, G. (2017). Platform business: from resources to relationships. NIM Marketing Intelligence Review, 9(1), 24.

Williamson, B. (2019). Datafication of education: a critical approach to emerging analytics technologies and practices. In Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 212-226). Routledge.

Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., & Allen, M. (2004). A meta‐analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71(2), 184-207.

1500 Word Critical Reflection / Peiru Peng / Relationality, Creative Practice and Education (2022-2023) by blogadmin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0