Getting Started with Differentiation
(with help from Rick Wormeli!)
A conversation inspired by the MiddleWeb Listserv
Also see: Heterogeneous Grouping chat
Amy Heinsma,a member of the Middleweb listserv, had an opportunity
to attend a Differentiated Instruction class sponsored by her local Board
of Cooperative Educational Services. The training focused on a pilot curriculum
developed by ASCD. One of the pieces of the workshop was being able to watch
teachers in action. During the first session, Amy says, she realized that
"I was watching none other than noted author and colleague from the
Middleweb listserv, Rick Wormeli."
NOTE: Rick is the author of Meet
Me in the Middle, one of the books discussed on the Middleweb listserv's
"Booklist." You can peruse that chat here.
Rick is also the author of Day
One and Beyond, a book designed for teachers new to the middle grades.
Read Rick's columns from NMSA's Middle Ground:
The
Middle School Brain
Help
with Homework
Amy writes: "Rick has a great chapter on differentiating instruction
as part of Meet Me in the Middle. As I viewed a videotape of Rick's
lessons about "Writer's Voice," I realized that I and many of
the colleagues in my class had lingering questions about the lessons and
how to get started. What better way to find out more than to ask! So I let
Rick know about the class and began asking him questions."
Here are excerpts from their e-mail conversation about differentiating instruction.
"Rick's insights and truthfulness will help anyone who is interested
in differentiation," Amy promises.
Amy wrote:
How did you begin differentiating personally and what advice would you give
someone who was beginning?
Rick wrote:
I read, read, and read some more, everything I could lay my hands on
about DI. I watched a few videos as well. Then I did the Nike thing p;
Just Do It. I decided to employ one DI practice per week. I found there
were a number of things that I was already doing just because they were
common sense, which was affirming. Mostly though, it was a little blind
faith, a lot of analysis of practice (like videotaping a lesson and analyzing
it later), a lot of reading, and a lot of discussion with others p;
done with a thick skin, too.
I couldn't let myself get so caught up in protecting my fragile ego that
I couldn't receive constructive critiques from colleagues, students, and
parents. It would've been three times as hard if I hadn't had others with
which to bounce around ideas and have some small amount of accountability
p; i.e., I didn't want to show up week after week without having taken
a few risks, tried some ideas, and thereby had something to report to the
group. I also had to give myself permission to fail and be a better teacher
the next time I tried something. It's an uneven, non-linear process. I get
passionate about one aspect one week, excited about another aspect another.
Over the course of the year it made sense, but at the time, it was a meandering
road designed by mood, students, curriculum, and my energy level that week.
Very soon, however, it became a natural course of planning. I can't turn
it off, in fact. My mind thinks this way p; what are the essential understandings
and what's just nice to know? Who are my students with special needs and
what portion of the instruction do I need to differentiate? Will it be process,
product, or content? How much scaffolding is necessary and what will it
look like? What are my formative and summative assessments and what experiences
do I need to facilitate in order for students to maximize their accomplished
mastery of this content?
DI is mostly about what we do ahead of time, not how we interact or conduct
the lesson at the time. There are some good aspects going on in the classroom,
but that facilitation can only occur with purposeful and thoughtful planning.
I can make flexible decisions because I've already prepared the resources
or other avenues in anticipation of student needs. Am I always prepared
for everything? No way. I get better with time, however.
Amy wrote:
When you demonstrated the lessons for the video, was that the first
time you taught that unit that particular way?
Rick wrote:
That was the first time I had ever taught those lessons. They filmed
me over five weeks. I had done scattered lessons on writer's voice other
years p; a mini-lesson here and there, but rarely with such concentrated
focus as I did last year. Wow, did it make a difference! I had students
skyrocketing off the rubrics for understanding and creating writer's voice
in their writing and in the writing of others. To be honest, I had settled
for less all these years and differentiating instruction liberated both
students and my teaching.
Amy wrote:
How do you grade differentiated assignments?
Rick wrote:
I go back to the essential understandings. In fact, those are the things
I list at the top of the columns in my grade book. For instance, I might
give students the task of writing a summary of plot devices used in a particular
novel, but I don't write "Summary of (insert novel name) at the top
of the grade book column. I write "(mastered) plot devices in (novel)"
If the focus was summary writing, then that's what I write p; "Summary
writing".
When I record grades then, it doesn't matter which route they took to learn
or to demonstrate those literary plot devices as long as they were held
accountable for learning them. I keep a separate matrix of the kids' names
along the vertical access and the assignments they do across the top. This
gets stapled into my grade book at the end of each quarter so I have a running
record of what was going on with each child.
In my math classes, I might record, "Dividing Fractions" at the
top of the grade book column, but on the matrix, some kids did different
pages in the textbook, some did certain problems that others did not, and
so on. Everything is graded against the standard of excellence that is set
for that lesson or unit. Students know those objectives and standards from
the first moment. Getting the final grade is anticlimactic p; students
know what they're getting for the most part because of our focus on constant
monitoring our own understanding.
Doing this makes reporting students' progress very easy. I can go right
to the grade book and make confident statements about what students know
and are able to do.
Students get a score based on the degree to which they demonstrated mastery
of a particular objective, standard, or goal. If a project lends itself
to a point-grading system such as the student had 27 correct out of 30,
I grade it that way, but I translate that percentage to the 4.0 scale for
the grade book. Students maintain grade sheets with their 4.0 scale values,
too.
Students are allowed to redo work until they reach the standard of excellence
for the assignment, within reason and at teacher discretion. If the student
is chronically not doing the assignment well, for example, I reserve the
right to mandate that he take the grade and move on. As a result of this
opportunity, I don't average the two grades for a student (the failing grade
on an assignment and the new grade he achieved after redoing it); I take
the higher grade. That higher grade is the undiluted indicator of mastery
which is what a grade should represent as we make instructional decisions
and provide feedback.
Work habits or effort are not factored into any grade. Again, I want an
undiluted statement of mastery. In addition, I do not allow any extra credit.
I don't assign tasks that can be bypassed by doing a poster or summary of
TV show to help mitigate the impact of a low grade. Such a policy has really
helped my students achieve well the first time around, and it's helped students
focus on learning, not grades, as what it's all about.
From time to time, I offer tiered assessments. Some students are ready to
demonstrate proficiency in five different objectives, but some are ready
to demonstrate proficiency in only three. I'll give them the level 1 test
with only three objectives being assessed, and then keep a record of the
other two objectives for which they have not yet demonstrated mastery. I'll
then insert a note into my plan book that I need to spiral back to those
students and teach them those two objectives and re-assess them before the
end of the grading period.
Amy wrote:
What was the socio-economic make-up of the class?
Rick wrote:
The socio-economic level is a real mix. In that class, there were students
from wealthy homes, and there were students living with two families sharing
a two-bedroom apartment (We're a major pipeline for families from the Middle
East and central America that are taking their first steps in America),
and everything in between. Some students were in homes in which parents
were undergoing divorce. One child had a major Tourette's Syndrome condition,
three children were from India and we had just heard about people being
killed by earthquakes in India.
Some students in that class were ESL students newly released from a specialized
ESL English class. A percentage of the class was in some sort of music elective,
so I gave them a majority of musical choices for how to demonstrate word
choice mastery that I didn't give any other class. The essay about the voice
in Barber's Adagio that Jesse shared was an example of this. It took him
four weeks to write it.
Amy wrote:
How long did it take to plan?
Rick wrote:
It took me two weeks, off and on, to put it all together. I did a lot
of reading on writer's voice and I asked three colleagues how they taught
it. Creating Writers by Spandel and Stiggins was a big help. Then I found
some pieces with strong voice. Finally, I wrote out the essential understandings
and then what I was going to do to assess students and teach them from what
I found out from the assessments. I made up a huge menu of options- physical
activities, writing activities, selections to read, many ways to interact,
grouping possibilities, guidelines for incorporating voice, and other strategies.
All I had to do then, was to refer to my menu of options as the weeks progressed.
Amy wrote:
What's a typical format for your class? Do you block? Do you have designated
times to do writing workshop, spelling, etc.?
Rick wrote:
Some years we have blocks, some years we have traditional schedules.
When ASCD filmed me, it was a traditional schedule, 47-minute classes. Every
year, I tinker with the sequence of lessons, even quarter to quarter. In
the first ten minutes, however, I make sure students encounter all the great
truths of my lesson.
Brain research has affected cognitive science here. We remember best what
we experience first. We move content that we encounter in those first 10
to 15 minutes to long-term memory better than any other portion of the lesson.
I'm not going to waste that maximum learning potential on clerical matters
like attendance, homework checking or announcements. I'll do those over
their head or a bit later in the period. We remember second best what we
experience last. This means that I always (well, as reality allows) end
with a summarization activity, not a "clean-up time," a break,
or time to work on homework. This is the primacy-recency effect that so
many researchers talk about.
Beyond these two pieces, some days I do things like "Caught Ya"
(grammar with a giggle), vocabulary development, anchor activities with
mini-lessons, writer's workshop some days, six-plus-one writing traits,
literature circles some days, Socratic seminars, peer critiques, and anything
else that comes under the speaking-listening-writing-reading-viewing English
pervue. I have found that the moment I set a standard daily schedule intending
for it to be applied each day for several weeks, reality gets in the way
and I have to be flexible. J
Amy wrote:
How do you find the time?
Rick wrote:
I found out that when I don't take the time to really prepare, I end
up wasting more time in the long run reteaching or tutoring students after
school, which adds a whole negative emotion to the atmosphere. I also don't
feel guilty doing professional reading during my planning period. I don't
mind working at night or about half a day and a couple of hours one night
on the weekends. I'm at a point now, too, where I can pull out something
I've used before, modify it according to this year's needs, and print it
off my computer. This speeds things up quite a bit.
It's a lot easier after you've done it for a year or two, and I've been
seriously focused on this as a theme of my teaching practice for over a
decade. I don't have to sort through files to find DI strategies p;
they're all at the front of my mind. At the very least, I've given myself
permission to try new things as well, which releases a lot more creative
thinking that often ends up being the most effective.
Amy wrote:
I've been working on trying to differentiate a unit on Greek myths.
I did a pretest with my students asking them to answer three questions 1)
what is a myth and mythology? 2) What makes a myth different from other
stories? 3) What are the purposes of myths? I split the students into two
groups so far p; one that really doesn't have any idea what myths are,
and those that have a pretty good idea. The intro. Group is reading the
myth of Arachne, and the second group is reading Pandora's Box. Both are
reading for the purpose (what does the myth explain?) Then I thought I would
have the kids jigsaw with each other about the two myths and discuss as
a whole group. Any suggestions/comments?
Rick wrote:
Your lessons sound solid. Question: The "have the kids jigsaw with
each other about the two myths and discuss as a whole group" seems
a little tossed together. Have you considered some focus questions for them
to consider? How about a structure for them, such as a graphic organizer
or a t-chart of some sort to help them focus on what you want them to focus
on (excuse my poor grammar)?
Also, will students early on have an opportunity to truly feel why ancient
man needed myths to explain his world? If so, how? Are there situations
today in which people feel the need to tell a story in order to explain
an otherwise misunderstood phenomenon? Why do we do this? This would be
helpful to students. How about the power to interpret myths from petroglyphs
or hieroglyphics? When I did this unit one year, we made Amphora pottery.
Students can write their own myths about natural phenomena, portray them
symbolically on the pottery, and then interpret the myths on each other's
pots.
The only DI issue I can see is whether or not group membership will be static
or dynamic. Will you be monitoring each group's progression as well as that
of individual members to make sure that placement is appropriate? If some
students catch on quickly and are ready to zoom ahead, are you prepared
to let them? Or how about some individuals who seem to not be comfortable
in the advanced group p; will it be okay to move them to another group
without stigmatization? If you have a classroom culture of everyone learning
differently, then it should be fine. In fact, those students will feel relief
and gratitude, not "Oh Man, I have to go to the slow group."
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION
BY JOINING THE MIDDLEWEB
LISTSERV.
MEMBERS CAN POST A MESSAGE TO:
middleweblist@sreb.org
BACK
to the MiddleWeb Listserv Conversations Index