Differentiation in the Modern Classroom

Human beings are unique, and learn in unique ways. Therefore, in any learning environment where an educator tries to teach two or more learners, it is inevitable that this educator will have to differentiate instruction. In other words, to be truly effective, the educator must tailor his or her instruction to the needs of each individual learner. This may not seem especially challenging in a class of two learners, but imagine a class of 30! Fortunately, differentiation is part and parcel of what happens in a Modern Classroom. This post explains why.

***

In a traditional classroom setting, differentiation is generally thought of as a tool for students with "special needs" -- such as IEPs or 504 plans -- and is carried out through lowered expectations for content mastery. A student with an intellectual disability will generally be given assignments that are "scaffolded," or modified downwards in terms of difficulty; this allows slower learners to "keep pace" with the rest of the class by doing a reduced amount of learning. Because they need more time to learn, they are given less to do, and learn less. Over time, as these students progress through an age-based academic system at the same rate as their peers, the gaps in their understanding continue to grow.

In a Modern Classroom, differentiation occurs not in terms of content, but rather in terms of time and support. Modern Classrooms recognize that all learners are unique: some learn quickly while others need more time, some prefer group work while others like independence, some need adult support while others prefer to figure things out on their own. To that end, Modern Classrooms provide spaces where all students are expected to achieve the same base level of content mastery. What varies in a Modern Classroom is not the challenge of the work, but rather the time that students have to complete it and the amount of support that students receive: each student receives just as much or as little time, and teacher assistance, as he or she needs. It is my belief that, given enough time and support, every student can and will learn anything.

***

Of course, in a world where students are expected to keep pace with top-down pacing guides, and where students aren't always able to access learning resources from home, it's not always possible to give students unlimited time. Therefore, in certain circumstances, a Modern Classroom teacher may need to make tough decisions about what learning is truly essential for all students, and what learning may be considered optional for students who are simply unable to reach it in a given time. One way of doing this is with a "Must Do / Should Do / Aspire to Do" system, in which a teacher classifies -- either explicitly or implicitly -- lessons in a given unit as:

• Must Do: These are the lessons that every student is required to do, to complete a unit. They cover the most important skills and content, without which end-of-unit assessments simply cannot be completed. Mastering these lessons is non-negotiable.
• Should Do: These are lessons which, while not essential to the learning goals of a unit, are nevertheless highly useful for students to master. All students are expected to complete these lessons, and students who do complete these lessons will inevitably produce more developed work on final projects or assessments. However, in unique circumstances, students can complete their end-of-unit assessments without being required to master them.
• Aspire to Do: These are the best lessons in any unit, because they take the skills that students have learned in "Must Do" and "Should Do" lessons and apply those skills in the most sophisticated and interesting ways. Students who complete these lessons will surely produce the highest-quality work products. Every student should aspire to reach these lessons -- but some simply might not. That's okay.

This is far from an ideal system -- it is my belief that every student in every class should learn every skill that is presented. But for the time being, Modern Classrooms operate in a world of deadlines and constraints, and a system like this one operates as a reasonable concession to those constraints, without lowering expectations for the level of mastery that students are expected to achieve. Unlike traditional methods of differentiation, it's also a system that gives every student, regardless of his or her limitations, the chance to learn everything.

***

I first developed a blended, self-paced, mastery-based approach to teaching during my first year in DC Public Schools. I taught a first-period precalculus course which had 21 students on its roster, but at the start of class I often had less than 5 in the room. I quickly realized, of course, that a one-size-fits-all model would not work for students who missed hours of class each week, and I had to make tough decisions about the skills that were most essential for the students whom I saw the least often. It was a tough course to teach, and if I'm honest with myself I know that many of my students -- even those who passed the class -- learned less than I expected them to on Day 1, and far less than their abilities would otherwise have allowed. But the "Must Do / Should Do / Aspire to Do" framework helped me teach them what was most essential for them to learn, and allowed both them and me to use our time together as efficiently as possible. I hope it will do the same for you.