Tuesday, December 12, 2017

Differentiation



Differentiation is for every student in every classroom. No two students are exactly alike. While there are similar levels of readiness, learner profiles, and levels of interest, each student brings into the classroom a nuanced background that requires careful consideration as a teacher prepares the content, process, and product of a lesson (McCarthy, 2014).


There are, however, some learners who require considerably more differentiation than others and these are the learners who will receive the greatest benefit from a teacher’s efforts to differentiate instruction at the needed levels. It is important to keep in mind that these students may come from all walks of life and may have varied academic backgrounds. Students who need the most differentiation in one subject may require little alteration in another subject. Jesse is a case in point. A bright, relatively engaged student, Jesse excels in math, science, drama, and plays after school sports. Obviously, quite well rounded, Jesse is not a troubled student who may have a stereotypical need for learning support and significant instructional differentiation. Regardless of his positive academic and behavioral background, Jesse found himself in need of differentiation in his 12th grade Philosophy class.


The evaluation for Jesse’s need of content and process differentiation came early as a result of daily formative assessments. Formative assessments take the form of online daily wrap-ups, weekly low-stakes 10 question quizzes, and plickers fun quizzes at the beginning of class. In addition, students record confusion and clarity in a philosophy journal. After two quizzes, a few wrap-ups, and an initial review of student journals, it was clear that the content being taught in Jesse’s philosophy class was not being delivered in an accessible way, at least for him. This is not uncommon for a subject like philosophy that often students are not introduced to until university studies. Clearly, a plan for instruction modification was in need.


The plan for differentiated content, process, and product was successful enough that the teacher adopted a few new learning strategies that benefitted many other students. Until this point, content had mostly been delivered through mini-lecture and students outside class reading. While the mini-lectures seemed effective in introducing students to new concepts, the textbook clearly required more scaffolding during class time. The teacher began differentiating content instruction by incorporating a type of readers workshop (Kleine, n.d.) where students who had proven, through formative assessments, to have a solid grasp on the content, were partnered with a circle of students who were struggling, of course, this included Jesse. Each learner is given a second reading of the chapter and the teacher is able to engage with each circle to enhance content acquisition.


Another content differentiation strategy adopted uses screencastify to make a 5 minute video covering the key concepts of each chapter. The screencast video is released to the students the day before the class mini-lecture and can be previewed to help the student prepare for the lesson. Student come with a few questions even before the lesson begins and they are asked to record the answer to their question if their question is answered during the lesson. Students with unanswered questions are then given time to ask at the end of the mini-lecture.


To differentiate for process, Jesse, along with four other students who were identified as requiring differentiated instruction, were asked to meet with the teacher for 10 minutes during Thursday’s lunch period. During this time the teacher models the processing of the content by having a conversation with himself. It may sound something like, “I wonder what it means to think presuppositionally? You know, the word presupposition can be broken down by looking at its prefix and suffix…”  At first the students observed this external processing with reservation but after about 4 meetings, were able to engage in the process themselves.  


The reading workshops proved to be a better way to tackle a difficult textbook for many learners (and the learners who do not need the reading workshops are leading them, thus, acquiring many other skills), and lunch period external processing was goofy but seemingly effective (especially in building teacher and student relationship). This left differentiation in product. A menu of activities proved to be an effective way to allow for many different learners to choose from a variety of activities that suited their learning styles and preferences. Students are able to choose very challenging activities that counted for their weeks work or from a number of activities that will give them access to multiple areas of the learning content.    


References:


McCarthy, J. (2014, July 23). 3 Ways to Plan for Diverse Learners: What Teachers Do. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/differentiated-instruction-ways-to-plan-john-mccarthy
Kleine, R. (n.d.). Rick's Reading Workshop: Overview. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/reading-workshop-overview

No comments:

Post a Comment