Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Differentiation in the classroom?

Does anyone have experience in having differentiation in the classroom actually work well for their child? Our district currently has an excellent self-contained gifted classroom but there is pressure to change it into differentiation in the classroom.
I think it won't work but I guess who knows. Our self-contained gifted class runs 1-2 grade level above the basic grade level.

My DS is receiving effective math differentiation in his 2nd grade classroom. He participates in the group "math talk" and then does his own work with manipulatives and pencil-and-paper problem solving, with the teacher drawing materials from 3-5th grade levels. Because the teacher is tuning the work specifically to DS' learning rate and abilities (and weaknesses in self-expression), this is preferrable to us than moving him to a 3rd grade classroom. There he would be learning math at the rate of an average kid who happens to be two years older than him.

DS' teacher has devised this approach with our support. I've described her as having a black belt in differentiation. The degree of DS' differentiation, though, takes a significant amount of dedication from the teacher, and I suspect it's a rare individual that would be so dedicated.

I would bet that most districts would make such a shift without training the teachers on how to differentiate effectively. Our district has a number of board-certified Master Teachers, who do appear to have the necessary skills... But they are not in every grade, and those skills also demand more pay, which means we will not likely ever get to the point where all teachers have that extra training.

Without a huge investment in professional development, it would likely not work.

DeeDee

Our experience has been the opposite, it didn't work out well - so my input is re the "gotchas". I think that our teachers thought differentiation meant letting the children work at their own pace on individual worksheets for math etc... and that worked out semi-ok (except that they weren't getting truly out-of-level instruction). Where the idea fell apart for my kids was in classroom discussions where the entire class was involved. My EG kiddo was beyond bored with the lack of depth in the discussion in science/history/etc, and my HG+ kiddo complained about how discussions never moved forward until everyone understood the concepts... which was (jmo) doubly a bad situation - not just that she was bored, but she became very frustrated with certain students who were usually the kids who needed a lot of repetition.

My kids also were frequently frustrated with some of the kids they worked on in group projects. I don't actually mind group projects so much in that I think it's good for my kids to have to work occasionally with a child who isn't holding up their fair share of the work due to lack of motivation etc, but I did find it frustrating that they never really had a chance to work in groups of same-ability-level kids, which they would have more opportunities for better fit in a self-contained gifted classroom.

I also think (and this is jmo based on a few classrooms)... that in a mixed-ability classroom, if it follows the typical bell curve, the vast majority of kids are going to of course be somewhere in the middle of abilities, and that was where the teachers' focus gravitated toward no matter how much the teacher truly wanted to differentiate.

I do think it's possible for it to work (and worth trying)... but I agree with DeeDee that without a large investment in professional development, as well as buy-in from the teachers that it's worthwhile, it is not likely to work.

polarbear

This is a hot topic in our district right now. The math program the district bought for middle school (Pearson's Digits) has built-in differentiation (pretest-- then teaching process with homework exercises designed for level of student-- then post-test). But the district frankly admitted recently that they are still trying to figure out how to use the program in the real-world classroom where one teacher has to work with 25+ students simultaneously.

DeeDee

From our short experience with in class enrichment, I'd say it is an enabling tool for teachers who "get it" and have the skillset. It could also open the door to more self-paced computerized material.

It seems to be working pretty well for my DS (who is not skipped, but has completely individualised maths instruction, and does not often seem to be bored in other lessons). This is a school with a maximum class size of 15, though.

I think the talk about differentiation is mostly an excuse not to do anything for the best students. Even if a teacher does differentiate well in a sequential subject such as math, there is usually nothing on the report card beyond an A grade in the subject. If an exceptional teacher manages to teach algebra to Jim in 4th grade while teaching the regular math curriculum to the other kids, when 5th grade comes all that Jim has officially done is pass 4th grade math. If his 5th grade teacher does not differentiate and build on his knowledge, his 4th grade differentiation may be mostly for naught.

To sum up, meaningful differentiation should be accompanied by documentation, and that documentation should determine what is studied next. The simplest way to do this is often to subject accelerate, but many educators are philosophically opposed to this.

Differentiation can work - really depends on the teachers/circumstances.

Our kids were in a "differentiate or die" elementary school. No kid was pulled out of the classroom for *any* special instruction, gifted or special ed. All of those resources were pushed into the classrooms. They were in a 4th/5th combined class (27 kids) w/ 2 teachers, plus assorted others (aides, student teachers, specialists, etc., ...) at any given moment. At one end of the spectrum, our twins studied pre-algebra, while at the other end was a kid learning the primary colors. Differentiation in that classroom was amazingly successful, a sight to behold.

It works beautifully at my son's small private school, but only because class size is around 8-9 kids, and teachers are given the time to develop an individualized curriculum for each student. After a week of review at the beginning of each school year, all kids are pretested in core subjects to determine their readiness levels. Then, the school literally closes for a week so that teachers can prepare individualized plans based on the pretest results. In addition, throughout the year, students take a pretest at the beginning of each new chapter. If they score 80% or higher, they get to skip that chapter and move to the next one. So, it is rare that even two kids in the class are working on the same math or language arts assignment on any given day. The teacher floats around the students and provides one-on-one instruction as needed. However, for "specials" like science, art, music, Spanish, drama, or PE there is no differentiation, and all the kids work at more or less the same pace.

In this system, my DS7 is working his way through a 4th grade math book and 6th grade spelling. Other kids in his class are doing working at, below or above grade level, as needed. And the best part is, my son thinks this is all perfectly normal.