differentiated instruction - kappa delta pi

Differentiated Instruction

A Kappa Delta Pi Webinar presented by

Adam Moore & Bethany Hamilton-Jones,

University of Rhode Island

Graduate Program in Special Education

March 6, 2012

Consider your teaching:

While planning instruction for your

classroom, do you place your students in

unique groups?

While delivering instruction, do you provide a

note-taking guide or graphic organizer?

When assessing students, do you consider

different levels of mastery depending on

students’ skill level?

If you answered yes,

Tiered Instruction

(Adapted from Tomlinson, 1999)

Teachers can differentiate

by:

Content- what is

taught & what the

student is expected to

learn

Tied to standards-

helpful to consider

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Content example

Represent and interpret data.

4. Organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and

answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each

category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another.

The above standard gives 3 tasks: organize, represent, and

interpret data:

Some students may be at the organize step- Venn diagram;

some at the represent- use Chart Dog™ to create graph

of class pets; some at interpret-discuss chart in Weekly

Reader.

Scaffolding

Background

knowledge

Pre-teaching

skills

Small group

instruction

KWL Charts

Teachers can differentiate

by:

Process-how students access the

content/curriculum

Influenced by learner profiles

“Good fit” for content

Process Examples

Meaningful groupings

Role-plays

Learning contracts

Frayer Model of Vocabulary

Etexts with text reader

Peer-assisted learning

Flexible Grouping

Jigsaw

Teachers can differentiate

by:

Product- how the student shows

what they have learned

Tied to assessment

of standards

Product Examples

PowerPoint with voice recording

Essay with transition words and sentence starters

Word sort instead of spelling test

Portfolio instead of test

Performance of a task- measuring or science lab

Group project

RAFTs

Role

Audience

Format

Topic

Used for writing tasks–

Choice

New Approach

Writing across all content areas

http://wvde.state.wv.us/strategybank/RAFT.html

http://wvde.state.wv.us/strategybank/RAFT.html

http://wvde.state.wv.us/strategybank/RAFT.html

http://wvde.state.wv.us/strategybank/RAFT.html

According to students’:

Readiness level- skill level and

background experiences of student

Prior knowledge, reading level, math

fluency, writing ability

Can be easily assessed through

Curriculum-based Measures (CBM)

According to students’:

Interest- what engages your

students?

Use reinforcement menus,

reading interest inventories,

interviews & observations

Build in choice whenever possible

According to students’:

Learning Style- visual, auditory,

kinesthetic

Perceptual Patterns (Markova, 1996)

Use learning style surveys,

interviews, and observations

Warning!

Rome was not built in a day- or in other words- begin

slowly!

Choose wisely- which content area topics lend

themselves to differentiated instruction?

DOES NOT replace explicit instruction.

Differentiation based on a student’s IEP MUST be in

place each and every time it is appropriate!

Meet Marcus Manning…

Marcus, Grade 10

Loves to write

Has a difficult time working on his own

Requires movement to be engaged in his learning

Benefits from talking about his learning with his peers

Has good knowledge of science, but is failing because

the majority of assessment of his learning is based on

multiple choice quizzes

CONTENT CONTENT CONTENT

CONTENT PROCESS PRODUCT

-Marcus demonstrates

understanding of content

-He is interested in the

content

-Structured group work for

science textbook chapter

-Use self-monitoring

checklist for independent

work

-Incorporate hands-on

experiments into lessons

-RAFT would allow

Marcus to demonstrate his

learning through writing

(instead of quizzes)

Resources

MATH http://illuminations.nctm.org/Lessons.aspx

http://mathplayground.com/

LITERACY http://tewt.org/

http://www.cast.org/

HISTORY/SOCIA

L STUDIES

http://socialstudiescentral.com/?q=content/differentiate

d-instruction

SCIENCE http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/scien

cedifferentation.asp

http://www.scienceforamerica.com/teacher-

preparation/differentiation-in-science.html

ELEMENTARY http://staff.antioch34.com/BAnderson/diffinfo.htm

http://www.edutopia.org/stw-differentiated-instruction-

replication-tips

GENERAL

DIFFERENTIATION

INFORMATION

http://differentiationkit.wikispaces.com/

http://differentiationdaily.com/

http://www.diffcentral.com/index.html

http://www.cec.sped.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Sc

affolding&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.c

fm&TPLID=24&ContentID=4703

References

Bos, C.S., & Vaughn S. (2002). Strategies for teaching student with learning and behavior problems. (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Friend, M., & Bursuck, W.D. (2012). Including students with special needs. (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Henley, M., Ramsey, R., & Algozzine, R. (2002). Characteristics of and strategies for teaching student with mild disabilities (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

LD Online. (2012). from http://www.ldonline.org

Markova, D. (1996). The open mind. Emeryville, CA: Conari Press.

Overton, T. (2003). Assessing learners with special needs: an applied approach (4th ed.). New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall

Tomlinson, C. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school's journey. Gifted Child

Quarterly, 39, 77-87.

Vaughn, S., Bos, C.S., & Schumm, J.S. (2006). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.