Yesterday’s classroom and students are very different from todays. Educators see a more diverse group of students that all come from a diverse background. From having a disability, being from a different culture, or having a different socio-economic background, teachers have to reach each student regardless of differences. But in reality, due to the lack of engagement, meaningless content, or not being able to grasp the material, many students fall through the cracks. So how does one face these issues and work toward solving them? These problems caught the attention of Carol Ann Tomlinson, the forerunner for Differentiated Instruction. She recognized the importance of understanding that every child is not alike, therefore, each child learns differently. As a teacher understands how each child learns, one is able to find more efficient and effective ways to teach his or her students (Tomlinson 2000).
According to Dr. Tomlinson, differentiated instruction “is the idea of differentiating instruction to accommodate the different ways that students learn involves a hefty dose of common sense, as well as sturdy support in the theory and research of education,” meaning each student learns differently and content/assessment should be provided in a variety of ways. Dr. Tomlinson focused on three aspects with differentiated instruction, the content, the process, and the product. The content aspect focuses on the information being presented. It is geared toward helping the teacher make sure he or she is clear and understands the facts of the content before presenting it to the students (Tomlinson, 2003). Along with understanding the content, the teacher evaluates how the content will be organized and taught. The second aspect, the process, Dr. Tomlinson talks about pre-assessments, and using the information gathered to accommodate the lessons, activities, and groups accordingly. With the third point, the product, the teacher uses the activities, pre-assessments, and lessons to create ways to assess the students based on their learning needs. This is to ensure the students have been provided options to express their mastery of the content.
Since differentiation has been implemented, educators have been divided on its success in the classroom. In two studies on differentiation in the classroom, the success rate varied, as to be expected. In a study by Dr. Pearl Subban, her results found that students in small groups with differentiated instruction had a higher success rate when completing assignments and classroom management. The participants stated the groups practicing differentiation often showed more structure and organization compared to a traditional classroom (Subban, 2015). The study also showed there was a strong focus on group work, with classroom organization being adjusted to accommodate the needs of the students in the group (Subban, 2015). The participants presented in a discussion that the organization of the classroom created an environment that allowed teachers to manage and use their time more efficiently between whole group, small group, or individualized instruction. Subsequently, lessons were structured and developed to efficiently focus on the student’s needs.
In one study using differentiation with advanced students, the results showed little to no change in student achievement. According to Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska findings, she reported that gifted classes use little differentiation practices. There was little emphasis placed on accelerative strategies in gifted programs (Baska, 2012). Practices and models that provide different types of thinking and problem-solving skills were not used consistently in gifted programs. Surprisingly, Dr. VanTassel-Baska observed very little use of metacognition in gifted classrooms. The individualization of differences in the gifted population, critical thinking, and problem solving were unlikely used in many classrooms Dr. VanTassel-Baska observed. Also, she found many gifted teachers hardly emphasized out-of-class learning. She proposed that this maybe due the lack of provision for extended activities (Baska, 2012).
Both these studies show how different the effects of differentiation can be in the classroom and on student learning. There is always going to be practices that are more effective than others. It is about knowing one’s students and learning their differences. As Dr. Tomlinson stated, “have common sense.” Good teaching practices incorporate differentiation whether the educator is aware he or she is differentiating, regardless of differences in background, race, gender, or cognitive levels. Our purpose as educators is to reach our students the best way we can.
Work Cited
- Subban, P., & Round, P. (2015). Differentiated Instruction at Work. Reinforcing the Art of Classroom Observation through the Creation of a Checklist for Beginning and Pre-Service Teachers. Australian Journal Of Teacher Education, 40(5),
- Tomlinson, C. (2000). Reconcilable differences: Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-11.
- Tomlinson, C. (2003). Deciding to Teach Them All. Educational Leadership, 61 (2), 6-11.
- VanTassel-Baska, J. (2012). Analyzing Differentiation in the Classroom: Using the COS-R. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 42-48.
