Category Archives: Inquiry

Synthesis

When I began my inquiry, I did not know much about differentiated instruction. However, through literature, reflections, and observations I can now spot differentiation inside a classroom, and recognize the benefits of it. My first several blog posts focused on reading peer reviewed journals to form an understanding of what differentiated instruction was. In fact, if you scroll down to the bottom of my blog, you will see a lot of definitions of differentiated instruction, and the role of process, product, and content. Later, I began reviewing other sources that suggested how to use differentiated instruction inside of the classroom. These strategies included grouping students based on interest or level. Furthermore, many sources demonstrated the importance of choice, and the role of tiered assignments. By learning about these concepts, and familiarizing myself with what each strategy means, I was able to begin recognizing differentiation inside of my practicum classroom. It was through ongoing reflections that I was able to recognize differentiation, and come up with a list of strategies for myself to incorporate during my 10-week practicum.

Through ongoing observations and reflections, I now have a new and deep understanding of differentiation. I am in no way an expert at what differentiation is. In fact, I am a student teacher that hopes to incorporate differentiated instruction in my practice, as I believe that this is the best way for students to achieve their true potential. I do not see the relevance in providing all 30 students with the exact same quiz/assignment, when 4 of the students are at a lower level, and many other students are above the grade 5 level. Additionally, I hope to use technology in order to differentiate my instruction. There are several strategies that I will implement, such as the use of email and PowerPoint to meet the needs of my students (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 87) Therefore, my goals as a student teacher will be to include several strategies of differentiated instruction. In doing so, I will be able to learn, first hand, what works, what does not work, and what I can improve on or change in my practice to meet the needs of my students.

To conclude, I wish to share a quote that I found during my inquiry research. “Every teacher who has entered a classroom has differentiated instruction in one way or another” (Levy, 2008, p. 162). However, not every teacher has gone above and beyond the everyday practice that entails differentiation. My research project has become a narrow focus on strategies to implement differentiation. Take a look at these strategies, read blogs and articles that highlight the key features of differentiation! These initial steps will broaden your perspective on differentiation. By opening your eyes to practices that meet the needs of diverse learners, you, in turn, will become a better teacher!

References:

Kara-Soteriou, J. (2009). Using technology to differentiate instruction across grade levels. Computers in the Classroom, 86-90.

Levy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the Needs of All Students through Differentiated Instruction: Helping Every Child Reach and Exceed Standards. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, 81 (4), 161-164.

Differentiated Instruction Strategies for my 10-week Practicum

Since January, I was able to observe students on a weekly basis and learn many strategies on how to implement differentiated instruction. This past Thursday was my final visit before my long practicum, which begins at the end of March. On Thursday, I took the opportunity to discuss with my school advisor the strategies that I am hoping to implement. Some of these strategies include:

Giving students a deadline on when to complete their work. However, providing some students – those that are at a lower level – with additional time.
I will be asking students to complete 3 large projects over the course of my 10-week practicum. Students will be provided with rubrics that meet THEIR needs. I will not provide students a general rubric, but instead, will personalize it for the students that are at a lower level, and even those that are at a higher level.
In addition to providing students with various rubrics, I will also provide students with choice in what they wish to hand in. Therefore, not every final project will look the same.
Although this one may be a bit tricky, I am hoping to have mini student conferences at least once or twice during the course of the 10-week practicum. This will allow me to better understand their needs, and make arrangements for students that are not yet meeting expectations.
Differentiating quizzes! During my weekly visits, I observed 4 students that require personalized quizzes. Therefore, I will continue to do this during the 10 weeks at my practicum school. Some ways to differentiate it include: including word banks for fill-in-the-blank type questions, providing these students with different questions, and front-loading the students prior to the quiz!
Make connections to the real world! By doing this, students will be able to find interest in the subject content.
Use technology to meet the needs of diverse learners! I will incorporate the use of PowerPoint and other programs to engage students. Furthermore, I will allow students (and parents) to keep in contact with my via email to differentiate instruction. These emails may be extra resources/support that students may require.

Observing the Benefits in Differentiation

As discussed in previous posts, differentiation can occur in many ways. However, the most effective way to differentiate instruction is to modify the content, process, and product. In my observations, I recently saw the use of differentiation by the alteration of a quiz. All 30 students were given a quiz on Thursday. By changing the content of the quiz for four students, they received an alternative quiz in which they could demonstrate their understanding. After giving students a good amount of time to complete their work, they were asked to hand it in. I took the opportunity to mark their quizzes and determine if the differentiation of the content was effective for those four students. From my observations, it was clear that the students that struggled to grasp the concept really appreciated the modified quiz. They received high B’s and A’s, which is a great motivation for the four of them. At the very end of the day, I handed back their quizzes and got to see the expressions of the four students (and the others in the classroom). Many, were ecstatic about their given mark. If the students that struggle grasping the concept were given the exact same quiz as their peers, they would have probably scored lower than a B, as demonstrated in previous assignments. However, by differentiating their quiz, they are able to show their understanding of the concept in an assignment that meets their needs. It would be unfair to provide all 30 students the same quiz, when not all of them are at the same level. Therefore, I am glad I received the opportunity to witness this, as it has provided me with insight on how to differentiate quizzes for those four students, and in addition, it has allowed me to see the benefits first hand in differentiating.

Exploring Three Different Teaching Instructions

As part of our inquiry class, I was required to do a reading that explores three different teaching approaches. The reason I have chosen to write a blog on this article is because it begins to recognize the role of differentiation in the classroom, and how it may look when used in real life contexts – not just theories that we have been exploring in previous posts.

The article begins by exploring two instructional strategies, and the lack of differentiation in their classrooms. The first teaching strategy begins by exploring a teacher who has a strong passion for teaching in a lecture format. As a result of his style of teaching, students lack engagement. “Mr. Appleton likes to lecture and works hard to prepare his lectures” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 2). By spending his time organizing such lectures and presentations, he rarely moves away from them. In fact, he hopes to get through his lessons, and by doing so, “does not notice or respond to student differences” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 3). The second classroom has more classroom engagement and choice than Mr. Appleton’s classroom. Mrs. Baker provides students with 10 options to present their final projects on Rome, and she also takes on student suggestions (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 2). “Although Mrs. Baker succeeds to some degree with engagement, a clear sense of what students should understand as a result of their study is almost totally missing” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 3). Both teachers are clearly hoping for their students to learn and meet their needs; unfortunately, their approaches lack differentiation. Therefore, the article presents an alternative teachings strategy that incorporates differentiation, engages students, and meets their needs.

Ms. Cassnell is the final teaching approach that the reader reviews. Her approach allows students to benefit and succeed from their schooling experience in several ways. Ms. Cassnell has topics planned for the year, but has not completed a concise day-to-day plan (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 4). In fact, she hopes to “understand her students and their needs more fully, [and then] she modifies her instructional framework and her instruction” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 4). Throughout the school year, Ms. Cassnell works with her students in whole and small groups to develop skills that she has set as goals for her students (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 5). Her class is also learning about ancient Rome, and what separates her instruction from Mr. Appleton’s and Mrs. Baker’s is that she differentiates their projects and understanding of Rome to the students personal interests. “Readiness differentiation occurs because each student adds personal research and writing goals, often with the teacher’s help, to his or her criteria for success” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 5). All of the teachers presented in the article allow the reader to compare and contrast instructional strategies that best meet the needs of students.

I found this article very useful, as it showed how teachers incorporate differentiation within their classroom. The previous blog posts have discussed what differentiation is, and how to use it. This article presents three different teaching approaches, and allows the reader to understand which best incorporates differentiated instruction. Ms. Cassnell’s class seems to be the most effective, as it includes engagement, and connection between student lives and subject content (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 6). I hope to incorporate differentiation during my practicum (which begins in exactly one month)! Therefore, it is important for me to begin moving past what differentiation is, as I have clearly understood the concept, and moving towards approaches in how to incorporate it into the classroom.

Reference:

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Mapping a Route Toward Differentiated Instruction. Educational Leadership, 57 (1), 1-8.

Strategies to Differentiate

Differentiation is an instructional model used to meet the needs of students. Previous posts have discussed what it means to differentiate and how teachers may attempt this instructional strategy. As we already know, to differentiate learning, we must change the content, process, and product for students. However, in addition to this, we as educators can differentiate our instruction by creating groups. “[G]rouping should be based on different criteria regarding the needs of the students” (Levy, 2008, p. 163). A few ways to group students is by learning styles, interests, and learning ability.

According to Gardner’s multiple intelligences, or Dunn and Dunn’s learning styles model, educators can determine which learning style best suits an individual student (Levy, 2008, p. 163). By determining whether a student is a visual, kinesthetic, auditory, musical, logical, naturalistic, intrapersonal, or interpersonal, students may be placed accordingly. In some cases, students may be placed in a group in which other students have a similar learning style. This type of grouping will allow students to “work together for a common goal (Levy, 2008, p. 163). In other cases, students may be placed in a group where there are a variety of learning styles in one group. This type of grouping allows students to “learn form each other” (Levy, 2008, p. 163).

Another way to group students is by placing thing in their interest groups. Many students come into school with a varying degree of interests. In my observations, I have witnessed a range of interests, such as sports, Mine Craft, video games, reading, dancing, singing, and nature. Based on these interests, students may be broken into groups to work in completing a task.

Finally, teachers may place students in groups based on their needs. By knowing your students and by completing ongoing formative assessments, teachers may create groups based on student needs (Levy, 2008, p. 163). There are times when there are a small group of students that do not completely understand what is expected of them after the whole group instruction (Levy, 2008, p. 163). Therefore, by placing these students in groups, it is easier to attend to them after the whole group lesson. Furthermore, this strategy is also useful for students above the standard grade level. “The teacher can pull these students together and take the lesson to the next level through more challenging activities” (Levy, 2008, p. 163).

In my observations, I have seen students placed in groups based on their needs. There are several students in my practicum classroom that require educational assistance and support from resource workers. Therefore, by placing them in an area within the classroom, in which they are all nearby, it makes it much easier for the teacher and the students. The teacher is able to continue the lesson by exploring the questions that these students may have. In addition, these students are able to help each other by working together in solving their problems. Recently, I observed an activity, in which the whole class was broken into four large groups. One group contained students that are exceeding expectations. They were given a more challenging section of the textbook to read. This section was a little longer than the others and required more notes to be completed. Another group that was created contained the students that required educational assistance. They were taken outside, alongside the EA, to complete their task. By grouping the students in such a way, the educator(s) were able to assist them more efficiently. Furthermore, the students were able to work effectively with each other.

Reference:

Using Technology to Differentiate Instruction

As stated in previous blog posts, I highly encourage the use of differentiated instruction within the classroom. It is an opportunity for students to learn in a way that meets their needs. Although many instructional strategies have been put in place for teachers to begin implementing differentiated instruction, I will focus on the use of technology and how it benefits and supports differentiation.

Technology has become increasingly present throughout schools within the Lower Mainland. Amy Benjamin highlights several features in which technology supports differentiated instruction including privacy, collaboration and communication skills, organization, learning styles, choices, and authentic learning (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 86). “Technology affords the privacy that is required in order to support self-esteem” (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 86). By using tools such as clickers, students are able to represent their understanding anonymously to their peers, and gain feedback from their instructor. Furthermore, by signing students up for emails, they are able to communicate their progress electronically. “Email communication allows teachers to offer differentiated instruction without embarrassing the students” (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 87). In the Delta School District, students have been provided Gmail accounts up until grade 12. Similarly, students in the Surrey School District have access to Fresh Grade, which is an online resource that supports student learning and progress. Other technologies allow students to become more organized, which in turn allow teachers to “implement differentiated instruction without having to do the organizational work” (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 87). Additionally, technology provides a wide range of learning styles for students to meet their needs. Technology may be used for visual, auditory, kinetic, and many other forms of learning styles. A lot of the new curriculum is based on the idea of student interest. Therefore, technology is highly beneficial as it provides students with choice. The final feature of technology that supports differentiated instruction is authentic learning. “Internet sites support authentic learning and constructivist instruction, which are important aspects of differentiated instruction” (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 87). By keeping all features in mind, teachers may integrate technology into their classroom to support differentiation.

It is important for teachers to understand ways in which technology may be utilized to support differentiated instruction. According to Julia Kara-Soteriou, technology such as clickers, and other classroom response systems are highly beneficial. These systems allow teachers to receive responses from students in which they feel comfortable sharing, as their answers are not exposed to their peers. In addition to these types of systems, the teachers are able to review their answers and modify their teaching based on the results (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 86). Email servers are also highly beneficial, as discussed above, to support differentiated instruction. I never considered this a resource that may be used to differentiate instruction. However, looking back at my undergraduate program, and even my time thus far in the BEd program, I have used email as a way to contact my instructors to receive additional support for particular assignments. Similarly, elementary and highschool teachers should offer such support for students who require differentiation. Other technologies, such as PowerPoint may be used to differentiate instruction. “Teachers can employ PowerPoint presentations for whole class instruction, as well as for small group and individual instruction, with the objective to teach the same concepts through the differentiation of the content of instruction” (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 87). Other resources include audio books, literature cyber lessons, WebQuests, software’s with customized programs, and word processing software’s (Kara-Soteriou, 2009, p. 90).

For those that are in favor of differentiating their instruction, I encourage using technology, a tool that is becoming more prevalent throughout classrooms, to support differentiation. Reviewing the technologies listed above, and by adapting them to fit the needs of your students, differentiation may become achievable within your classroom.

Reference:

Kara-Soteriou, J. (2009). Using technology to differentiate instruction across grade levels. Computers in the Classroom, 86-90.

What is Differentiated Instruction?

In my belief, every learner is different; therefore, I strive to incorporate various learning styles to ensure a quality learning experience. How can I do this? By differentiating my instruction!

To begin, I want to clearly state what it means to differentiate instruction. I have been discussing differentiation in my previous posts but have not clearly defined what it is. Differentiation is “’a philosophy that enables teachers to plan strategically in order to reach the needs of the diverse learners in classrooms today’” (Parsons, Dodman, & Burrowbridge, 2013, p. 39). In plain and simple English, it means to provide your students with the resources to meet their needs! Although the thought of this may seem impossible, as teachers have up to 30 students with unique personalities and learning styles, it is quite simple! How many teachers have provided students with a choice? How many teachers have allowed some students more time to complete their work? “Each teacher who has entered a classroom has differentiated instruction in one way or another. Teachers differentiate when they give a student more to finish an assignment, allow children choice . . . give different types of assessments” (Levy, 2008, p. 162). This is the simplest form of differentiating instruction for your students. However, to go above this is to provide your students an experience in which school becomes enjoyable.

To go above the basic form of differentiation, there are three words that teachers must understand: content, process, and product. Content is the material that is being taught to the students “Each child is taught the same curriculum but the content may be quantitatively or qualitatively different” (Levy, 2008, p. 162). The process is how the students learn the subject material. “The activities we provide for students learning must address different student abilities, learning styles, and interests” (Levy, 2008, p. 162). Finally, the product is how students are able to demonstrate their learning. This component of differentiated instruction may be formative or summative assessment but must reflect the students learning ability (Levy, 2008, p. 162). Refer to below to figure 1 for a more concise understanding of content, process, and product.

Figure 1:

Screen Shot 2016-02-14 at 1.06.56 PM

(Baecher, Artigliere, Patterson, & Spatzer, 2012, p. 17)

Having understood content, process, and product, teachers are able to begin differentiation. Similar to the example above, I will try to incorporate differentiation when working with students. I think it is crucial for teachers to begin implementing differentiated instruction slowly. Having to integrate differentiation in 7 elementary school subjects may be overwhelming. Therefore, I will begin practising differentiation in Math and English. Once I become comfortable in differentiating the content, process, and product, I will begin integrating more subjects in. Sooner or later, my entire practice will be differentiated.

References:

Baecher, L., Artigliere, M., Patterson, D., & Spatzer, A. (2012). Differentiated instruction for English language learners as “variations on a theme”. Middle School Journal, 43 (3), 14-21.

Parsons, S., Dodman, S., & Burrowbridge, S. (2013). Broadening the view of differentiated instruction. The Phi Delta Kappan, 38-42.

Taylor, B. (2015). Content, Process, and Product: Modeling Differentiated Instruction. Learning to Teach, 13-17.

Inquiry and Practicum Reflection

During my practicum visit, I had a pretty interesting lesson on Second-Step. I knew in advance that the students had already done many of these program lessons and may not have enjoyed them. Therefore, I tried to implement other activities and videos as supplements to the videos that the Second-Step program provides. However, as soon as I began, I found the students were complaining about the videos, having viewed these in previous years, and having learned the same concepts. I tried to continue on with the lesson but struggled in getting them to participate (during some portions of my lesson). At the very end of my lesson, when viewing the “Walk, Walk, Walk” music video, I had lost their attention and had to stop my lesson abruptly.

Reflecting back on this lesson, I can take away many positive aspects. Although the lesson did not go as planned, I learned much more than I ever could have in a lesson where my students remained on task the entire time. Do not get me wrong- I would love for the students to be engaged throughout my entire lesson. However, that will not be the case 100% of the time. Teachers with years of experience may have lessons that fail, and therefore, I am glad that I experienced this failure early on so I can learn from it before the beginning of my extended practicum. I am already articulating ways to engage the students for the following second-step lessons. Furthermore, I am discovering ways in which I may assist students that require differentiation.

This lesson went hand in hand with my inquiry on differentiated learning. “’Differentiated instruction implies a purposeful process for adapting the teaching and learning processes of the classroom to accommodate the needs of all learners’” (BCTF, 2015). According to the BC Teachers Federation, there are several aspects of differentiated learning, which I will discuss below. To begin, I must be a responsive teacher, especially when considering student needs (2015). Considering they did not enjoy the Second-Step lesson (and program in general), I must provide them unique ways in grasping the concepts. In addition, you must be flexible and adaptable when your students are not responding positively to a lesson (2015). I must be aware of student behavior, and provide students that are finding my lesson a challenge or boring with alternatives. This can only be done if I get to know my students better (2015). Some students may be preoccupied with other activities; therefore, I must get to know them better so I can differentiate my instruction to engage them with the rest of the class and the lesson. I am confident that as the weeks progress, I will be able to incorporate differentiation throughout my lessons to engage the students.

I am hopeful that next time I visit my practicum classroom, they will enjoy the lesson that I have created for them.

Reference

BCTF. (2015, June). Differentiated Instruction. Retrieved January 22, 2016, from BC Teacher’s Federation: https://bctf.ca/issues/resources.aspx?id=24271&printPage=true

Does Assessment Kill Student Creativity?

Does Assessment Kill Student Creativity

Pre-Reading:
When reading the title, “Does Assessment Kill Student Creativity”, I considered all of the positive aspects of assessment, as opposed to focusing on the challenges. I personally think some form of assessment if necessary for students. Maybe not at a primary level, but in intermediate and in high school, I can recognize its importance. I am not suggesting that teachers only assess students through standardized tests, but, I do think that assessment (formative or summative) is crucial for a student’s success.

During Reading:
-Because of pressures placed on teachers and how they use instructional time, creativity is given less focus
-“Teachers are required to devote increasingly large portions of their instructional time preparing students for assessments” p. 254
-What is creativity?
o“Interaction among aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a perceptible product that is both novel and useful as defined within a social context”
-Creative process occurs through two stages: divergent and convergent
-Divergent: brainstorming to generate ideas
-Convergent: evaluating/choosing ideas, completing the project, and then discussing the results
-*Science fair example: choose an idea, complete the project, and explain the outcome to viewers!
-Not all students reach their potential in being creative because of classroom assessment
-Teachers ask students to display their best work: “teachers communicate to students that outperforming others, rather than self-improvement, is the reason for engaging in achievement-directed behavior” 257
-Assessments in classrooms allows to comparisons amongst peers
-Assessment itself doesn’t diminish creativity, but the message that teachers convey when asking students to do their best is what may kill creativity
-Counter argument: some students may excel in such structured classroom settings
-How to protect creativity: convey the message of assessment differently!!
-Minimize comparisons! *an example of this in my practicum classroom comes to mind. When doing DPA with the classroom next door, I suggested our class vs. theirs. The teacher opposed to this idea as we are creating comparisons such as: my class is better than yours (depending on the results). Therefore, we ended up mixing the two classes together to create teams
-Put less pressure on assessment!
-Don’t see low grades on assessments as a way to punish the students, but as a way to learn from them! This can be a useful for teachers as well as the students

Post Reading:
I thought this reading would be about the consequences of assessing students, and only put forth the negative aspects of it. However, this reading did much more than that. It explained creativity, and then instead of breaking down the negative aspects of assessment, it explained how the teacher’s role in conveying messages may be the part in what kills creativity. For most students, it is not the assessment in itself, but the way the teacher puts pressure on the students. I thought this article was interesting as it explained how to use assessment in a way that minimizes the pressure! We had a discussion last term, in which one of my peers said that a lot of this program is telling us “what not to do”, when will we learn “what to do”. This article did just that. It explained the consequences of how teachers present information, and provided the reader with alternatives in communicating.

Reference:
Beghetto, R. A. (2005). Does Assessment Kill Student Creativity? The Educational Forum , 254-263.

Differentiated Instruction: Focus on Math

The article I have chosen to discuss on my blog is very important for my inquiry research. It supports my concept on how differentiated instruction focuses on the various subjects throughout elementary school. Although it would be very difficult to explore all subjects in which teachers differentiate their instructions, I believe that focusing on Math, Science, and English will contribute immensely to my inquiry research. The article I have chosen focuses on math, and the use of a mathematical game to support students with varied needs. “Designing Differentiated Mathematics Games” by Christine Trinter, Catherine Brighton, and Tonya Moon provides a concise article on the various abilities primary students have when entering the public school system. To address their needs, the authors have suggested the importance of incorporating games to differentiate instruction. This method allows students to “make connections among multiple representations of mathematical topics” (Trinter, Brighton, & Moon, 2015, p. 93). Playing the game that this article recommends provides students with varied needs to “draw on [their] creativity”. I enjoyed reading this article, and would definitely use this to support my stance on differentiated learning.

Reference:
Trinter, C., Brighton, C., & Moon, T. (2015). Designing Differentiated Mathematics Games. Gifted Child Today, 88-94.