Thank you for reading! You can read just one part or all. I thought that breaking it up would take the pressure off of people.
When I look at my results compared to the literature reviewed, I was pleased to see that I was able to get positive results with the suggestions and recommendations that I took from the literature. I found the four guiding principles for effective differentiation by Rock et al., to be the most informative and helpful: focus on the essential ideas and skills; be responsive to each student and their differences; integrate assessments within instruction; and adjust content, process, and products to meet each students’ needs. During my three weeks of research, I continuously focused on these four principles when planning and teaching.
To meet the first guideline of focusing on essential ideas and skills, I did several things. First, I provided students with different homework assignments. If the assignment was from the textbook, I would assign my average and high preforming students with ‘challenge’ problems. The lower preforming students’ assignment were still provided practice at grade-level expectations, but it was meant to not overwhelm them or be problems that were out of their reach. While in class I would have all students do problems that focused on the essential topics, and the higher-level students would take the problems a step or two further. Another way that I focused on the essential ideas was that I reduced the quantity of activities and/or problems that we did. I focused on slowing things down and providing all students with quality activities and problems that provided them ample opportunities to learn the material. In the past I would feel like I had to rush through things to keep my higher-level students engaged, which was hinderance to my low-preforming students. By differentiating the problems, the high students were unable to rush through problems because the problems were more challenging, and the low students were given the time they needed to process and understand the problems.
Creating varied homework assignments and problems in class also helped me achieve the second guideline, being responsive and understanding of students’ differences. The first thing I focused on was to learn more about my low preforming students individually; so I spent time building relationships with my low preforming students. In the past, I would have given them space and time to warm-up to me and the class. During my research, I took a more proactive approach and sped up the process of getting to know them. There were many positive changes because of my proactive approach to my students, but one stands out as huge gains. I had a low preforming student that had only worked about 20% of the time before the three-week research period. During this period, I made a conscious effort to provide him with support and reminders about working. Since providing him with this extra attention, he has begun working in class on a regular basis and passing all of his assessments. The turnaround from this student has been amazing, especially when he has historically been a student that does not put forth much any effort in any of his classes. If I get nothing else out of this research, I feel it has been successful because of the improvement and connection that I have been able to make with this one student.
Another way that I have been acknowledging and working with my students’ differences has been working with my ELL students. In the past, I would provide them with more support and answer vocabulary questions on assessments, but I never did much more. What I tried new was to create vocabulary cards for each ELL student. On the cards, the vocabulary word is on the front and the back has a definition (in friendly terms) and picture. I allow them to use the cards on all assessments. Each of the ELL students was very appreciative of the vocab cards and all have shown improved grades on their assessments and understanding of the problems. They are no longer being bogged down by the vocabulary, which can be so difficult for them. They are able to understand the concepts and focus on the math.
The final way that I focused on the second guideline was by creating assessments (tests and quizzes) of different levels. In the past, my lower level students would struggle and give up on a test the first time they saw a difficult problem. By creating a test with problems at grade-level expectations, they did not give up and were willing to work harder on the assessments. Because they have begun having success on assessments, their confidence has grown and they have begun doing more homework and participating more in class. The different level assessments have also been beneficial to my higher-level students because I have been able to challenge them appropriately because I feel more comfortable putting higher-order thinking problems on the assessment.
The third guideline, integration of assessment, was the easiest for me to incorporate into my class. During the three-week period, I used exit tickets and other formative assessments to gage student understanding. Exit tickets were probably the most successful because I was able to look at each student’s work individually and take the time to provide them with feedback. After getting several tickets back, students began looking forward to seeing how they did on them and would be happy if they got the problems correct. In addition to exit tickets, I would monitor students’ understanding of problems by walking around the room, calling on students, and using individual dry erase boards to practice. While this was the easiest guideline to incorporate, I found it the hardest to remember to do. I had to remind myself throughout the period to continue checking work and not get complacent or assume the students understood the material.
The final guideline of being flexible, I found to be the most important and sometimes most challenging. Using exit tickets made this process a little easier, but I found myself wanting to keep to the pacing and activities that I had planned over the weekend. I know that it is important for me to change my plans based on what my students need, but it is also important for me to stick to a relatively good pace. The times that my flexibility was most affective were when I was able to pull from activities that had worked in the past. When all else failed, I would pull out the individual dry erase boards and have students work out problems, which is something that I found they enjoyed through the survey. In order to be successful in the fourth guideline, I learned that it is imperative that you have a large teaching toolbox to pull from. When you first begin to teach, you might have a small toolbox, but over time, you will add things and find things that are worth doing again. Luckily, I have been teaching for over ten years and have many different activities that I can pull from.
At the beginning of this process, I found myself getting overwhelmed, just as the literature said I would. However, what I found was that I also became comfortable with the process and more confident in it. By going back to the four guidelines when I began to feel overwhelmed or stressed, I was able to focus on what was best for the individual student needs.
Throughout this process I saw my thoughts and procedures change as a teacher, which was a pleasant surprise. I also saw my classroom and students change. My classroom environment is not perfect, but my students are beginning to work together better and be more accepting of each other’s differences. I have also seen my lower students take more risks and do problems and things that they would have never done before this process. I have also seen some of my average students push themselves so that they can do the more challenging and higher-level problems. Finally, I have seen my higher-level students be challenged and appreciative of the different leveled assignments and activities, and no longer having to wait for everyone else to catch up.
Creating varied homework assignments and problems in class also helped me achieve the second guideline, being responsive and understanding of students’ differences. The first thing I focused on was to learn more about my low preforming students individually; so I spent time building relationships with my low preforming students. In the past, I would have given them space and time to warm-up to me and the class. During my research, I took a more proactive approach and sped up the process of getting to know them. There were many positive changes because of my proactive approach to my students, but one stands out as huge gains. I had a low preforming student that had only worked about 20% of the time before the three-week research period. During this period, I made a conscious effort to provide him with support and reminders about working. Since providing him with this extra attention, he has begun working in class on a regular basis and passing all of his assessments. The turnaround from this student has been amazing, especially when he has historically been a student that does not put forth much any effort in any of his classes. If I get nothing else out of this research, I feel it has been successful because of the improvement and connection that I have been able to make with this one student.
Another way that I have been acknowledging and working with my students’ differences has been working with my ELL students. In the past, I would provide them with more support and answer vocabulary questions on assessments, but I never did much more. What I tried new was to create vocabulary cards for each ELL student. On the cards, the vocabulary word is on the front and the back has a definition (in friendly terms) and picture. I allow them to use the cards on all assessments. Each of the ELL students was very appreciative of the vocab cards and all have shown improved grades on their assessments and understanding of the problems. They are no longer being bogged down by the vocabulary, which can be so difficult for them. They are able to understand the concepts and focus on the math.
The final way that I focused on the second guideline was by creating assessments (tests and quizzes) of different levels. In the past, my lower level students would struggle and give up on a test the first time they saw a difficult problem. By creating a test with problems at grade-level expectations, they did not give up and were willing to work harder on the assessments. Because they have begun having success on assessments, their confidence has grown and they have begun doing more homework and participating more in class. The different level assessments have also been beneficial to my higher-level students because I have been able to challenge them appropriately because I feel more comfortable putting higher-order thinking problems on the assessment.
The third guideline, integration of assessment, was the easiest for me to incorporate into my class. During the three-week period, I used exit tickets and other formative assessments to gage student understanding. Exit tickets were probably the most successful because I was able to look at each student’s work individually and take the time to provide them with feedback. After getting several tickets back, students began looking forward to seeing how they did on them and would be happy if they got the problems correct. In addition to exit tickets, I would monitor students’ understanding of problems by walking around the room, calling on students, and using individual dry erase boards to practice. While this was the easiest guideline to incorporate, I found it the hardest to remember to do. I had to remind myself throughout the period to continue checking work and not get complacent or assume the students understood the material.
The final guideline of being flexible, I found to be the most important and sometimes most challenging. Using exit tickets made this process a little easier, but I found myself wanting to keep to the pacing and activities that I had planned over the weekend. I know that it is important for me to change my plans based on what my students need, but it is also important for me to stick to a relatively good pace. The times that my flexibility was most affective were when I was able to pull from activities that had worked in the past. When all else failed, I would pull out the individual dry erase boards and have students work out problems, which is something that I found they enjoyed through the survey. In order to be successful in the fourth guideline, I learned that it is imperative that you have a large teaching toolbox to pull from. When you first begin to teach, you might have a small toolbox, but over time, you will add things and find things that are worth doing again. Luckily, I have been teaching for over ten years and have many different activities that I can pull from.
At the beginning of this process, I found myself getting overwhelmed, just as the literature said I would. However, what I found was that I also became comfortable with the process and more confident in it. By going back to the four guidelines when I began to feel overwhelmed or stressed, I was able to focus on what was best for the individual student needs.
Throughout this process I saw my thoughts and procedures change as a teacher, which was a pleasant surprise. I also saw my classroom and students change. My classroom environment is not perfect, but my students are beginning to work together better and be more accepting of each other’s differences. I have also seen my lower students take more risks and do problems and things that they would have never done before this process. I have also seen some of my average students push themselves so that they can do the more challenging and higher-level problems. Finally, I have seen my higher-level students be challenged and appreciative of the different leveled assignments and activities, and no longer having to wait for everyone else to catch up.