Differentiated Instruction-Finding Manageable Ways to Meet Individual Needs

What is it?  Oh yeah, it’s that kind of teaching that gives every student what they need.  That’s Utopia isn’t it?  Can anyone really expect us to be able to do this?  I suppose there must be teachers out there who are able to do it or it wouldn’t be at the forefront of the minds of those that matter.

I have tried to teach, using ability grouping in a classroom.  I was not very successful when I tried this strategy by myself. However, now that I work as a Title I teacher and can work with small groups, either inside or outside of the regular classroom, ability groups are great.  Differentiated Instruction is very do-able in this scenario.  I have used a few of the activities and strategies that are supported in this article. Although I agree with the idea of DI, I also agree that it will be difficult to sell it to faculties as a whole.

This article by Scott Willis and Larry Mann, came from Curriculum Update, a publication from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (2000).  This came out several years ago and we have heard a lot about DI since then.  Some of us have had some professional development along these lines, while others don’t even know how to define it. The article talks about this not-so-new trend and several ways that teachers might be able to modify their instruction, in order to meet the needs of diverse learners.  They contend that most teachers agree with the idea of DI on the philosophical level, but fall just short of embracing it o n the practical level.  After all, that would mean that we would have to look at our lessons, our objectives, and think of at least two other ways to teach each of them.  Where would this time come from?

In order to make this article valuable to the teaching field, authors Willis and Mann explained what DI is and what it isn”t.  They gave examples of how to accomplish this feat.  They interviewed teachers from different grade levels and conveyed their thoughts to us.  It was a very effective way to present this argument for Differentiated Instruction.  After reading this article you can hardly say no to DI.

In further definition, it is said that “one size doesn’t fit all”.  Instead of running students through the curriculum in lockstep fashion, teachers should modify instruction to meet students readiness levels, learning preferences, and  personal interests.  Isn’t this just the way they did it back in the days of the One Room Schoolhouse?  The teacher would introduce the concept in the “big lesson” that would address the majority of the class, and then she/he would simplify some activities for the lower level learners.  Of course those students who already “got it” would act as peer tutors or would work on some type of project that would show the teacher how well they understood what she/he had taught.

A common theme throughout this article is how we, the teachers, must change our perception of what school should be like, to break the old patterns of teaching.  (Isn’t that way the way that worked back at the One Room Schoolhouse?)  If we fail to differentiate instruction, any child who differs from the norm (which is the organized, left-brained learner who loves books) will suffer.  The organized, left-brained learner who loves books, only represents one-quarter of the population.  That won’t do much for our test scores, will it?

According to author Carol Ann Tomlinson, who wrote The Differentiated Classroom:  Responding to the Needs of  All Learners (1999), we can differentiate our instruction by making modifications in three general areas of the curriculum.        

  1. Content refers to the concepts, principles and skills that teachers want students to learn.  All students should be taught the same big ideas, but adjust the degree of complexity of the explanation.  Content also refers to the means teachers use to give students access to these skills and knowledge.  Some of the examples might be the texts, lectures, demonstrations and field trips.  An advanced learner might be directed to complex texts, Web sites or experts to interview, while providing a student of modest capacity with reading buddies, videos, demonstrations and organizers that gather and synthesize information and make it more accessible.  (So, content is the what (concepts, principles, and skills) but it’s also the how you want the students to get at these (by text, lectures, demos, and field trips).

2. Process refers to the activities that help the students make sense of the ideas and skills taught. Students can be provided with more complex activities while others can benefit from more scaffolding, depending on readiness levels.  Some examples of scaffolding include step-by-step directions, reteaching, and additional models to help the challenged student make the knowledge their own.

3. The Product refers to the culminating project that allows students to demonstrate what they have learned.  Different students can create different products, based on the three factors we’ve discussed, readiness levels, learning preferences and interests.

The authors state that teachers must be “crystal clear” about what they want to teach.  The curriculum should be based on broad concepts, not “factoids”.  This would make DI very difficult.  We must have a range of strategies at our disposal.  Some of these could be, cooperative learning, multi-age grouping, and addressing multiple intelligences.  Flexible grouping seems to be a must with DI.  A student might be placed in a group with similar readiness levels for reading instruction but with a dissimilar one for discussion of a favorite book.  Tiered activities, where the concepts and skills remain the same for all students but the “routes of access” vary in complexity is one more way to differentiate instruction.

One first grade reads stories to the entire class on Mondays, then break into challenge level groups for the next three days.  On Fridays, the whole class reviews the story one more time to measure improvement and reinforce learning.  I think that this idea would produce some positive results.  Another second grade teacher differentiates for advanced learners by using curriculum compacting.  This is where the student who has mastered the concept is allowed to pursue higher-level material on his/her own, while the teacher works with the rest of the class.  A fourth grade teacher found that providing her students with different activities to choose from, actually differentiated instruction when they chose their learning style activity.  Some other teachers used student contracts and open-ended assignments to offer higher-ability students an opportunity to extend their learning as far as the they want to try.

For DI to happen, the administrator has to become knowledgeable about differentiation, both in philosophy and classroom implications.  This may happen as a result of shadowing or actual college coursework.  You can’t learn to differentiate in a one-afternoon workshop.  At the school level you really need a person who guides the effort, aligns staff development, curriculum, materials selection and methodology.  Administratively, it’s a monumental task, but worth it.  It’s what we should be doing for kids.  If a cadre of interested teachers were trained and began doing peer coaching, that would really put DI in place.  Some principals asked their teachers to create or modify a unit of instruction, using DI principles.  Others asked for teacher-developed activities and lessons that represent “best practices” in DI.  This would be so helpful, especially for teachers just starting to DI.

Many teachers that were interviewed complained of frustration, exhaustion, and time-consumption–but would not go back to the old way.  They felt that their students were more engaged and made more rapid progress. Their bright students were no longer bored, and struggling students are finding learning more accessible.  Veteran teachers are becoming energized, and new teachers excited about teaching.

Some other strategies mentioned in Tomlinson’s book, The Differentiated Classroom, are as follows:  stations, agendas, orbital studies, entry points, problem-based learning, choice boards and 4MAT.  These strategies come with user-friendly definitions and examples.  This article provided some very good “seed information” for teachers to think about.  If you are interested in becoming a more effective teacher, preparing yourself to do DI would be a wonderful start.   Now, this opinion and a dollar will buy you a coke.  Good luck.