Читать книгу Differentiation and the Brain - David A. Sousa - Страница 7

CHAPTER 1

The Nonnegotiables of Effective Differentiation

It seems awkward to even have to discuss the idea of differentiating curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of different kinds of learners, but the reality is that too many classrooms are still teaching with the focus of “one for all and all for one.”… Traditional school structures … make the idea of differentiating to maximize learning a mountain still to be climbed. But we must [climb it].

—H. Lynn Erickson

At an education conference focused on teaching and learning, a veteran teacher shared that she was teaching a multi-age class for the first time in her twenty-plus-year career as an educator.

“That must be quite an adjustment for you,” said the younger educator seated beside her. The more senior teacher reflected for just a moment and responded, “Actually, it really hasn’t been an adjustment for me. I’ve taught a multi-age classroom every year. But this is just the first time someone put the sign on my door.”

What we now call differentiated instruction is not new. It simply asks educators to recognize what teachers have known for centuries: students do not arrive at school as matched sets. Because the pace of brain development varies among children, it is likely that in any third-grade class, some students are reading much like first graders and others like sixth graders. A third grader who reads like a second grader may be ready to do fractions in mathematics well before most of her classmates. In other words, the fact that all students in a particular classroom share a similar birth date is no indication they all learn at the same rate, in the same way, and with the same support systems.

Few educators seriously debate whether a particular chronological age is a trustworthy predictor of a student’s academic accomplishments. Most of us who have taught have ample evidence that academic variance is a given among students of any grade level—preschool through graduate school. The fundamental question each teacher has to answer is whether to respond to those differences—and if so, in what way.

A great number of teachers plan and teach as though all the students in a given classroom are essentially alike. When it becomes evident that some students are confused, lost, or bored, some teachers quickly try to offer additional encouragement, support, or work as a means of addressing the mismatch between lesson and learner. Others simply follow their initial instructional plans. After all, they remark, there’s a lot of material to cover.

A Case in Point

It was just the first week of school, and already Mrs. Worrell felt tired. Her class enrollment was higher this year than last. The students in front of her came from several different language groups, from a broad spectrum of economic groups, and with a five-year span of achievement in reading and mathematics. Her job was to get all the students ready to pass the same test on the same day under the same conditions. She had nine months to do that. The year stretched ahead of her like a bad movie. She had too many students, virtually no planning time, no one to help in the classroom, a single textbook for each subject, too few supplies, too much content, and a mandate to make sure everyone would look competent on the test that loomed ahead of them all. She looked at the students as they left the room to get on the afternoon school buses. They looked as weary as she felt. She wondered if everyone in the building felt that way.

A Focus on Learners

Differentiation stems from the research-based perspective that students will engage more fully with learning and learn more robustly when teachers proactively plan with their differences—as well as their similarities—in mind (Tomlinson, 2017; Tomlinson et al., 2003). Such an instructional model is learner centered; it accepts the premise that a teacher’s role is not simply to cover material or expose students to content, but rather to maximize student learning. Therefore, if a student is missing knowledge or skills from the past necessary for success with current learning expectations, the teacher’s role is to help that student move both backward and forward with essential content. If a student already knows what a teacher is about to teach, the teacher’s role is to help that student move beyond current learning expectations so growth will continue. Similarly, differentiation operates from the premise that if a student is not learning efficiently or effectively in one mode, a wise teacher looks for another pathway to learning that will work for that student, and if content seems irrelevant to or disconnected from a student’s world, the teacher seeks to build bridges between critical content and student interests.

The bedrock of differentiation is a five-part argument foundational to effective teaching.

1. The environment students are asked to learn in must invite learning. That is, it must be safe, challenging, and supportive for each student. To that end, the learning environment calls for a teacher who has a growth (fluid) mindset (Dweck, 2006), who forges meaningful connections with each learner, and who brings students together in a mutually supportive community or team of learners.

2. A teacher should be able to clearly delineate what constitutes essential knowledge, understanding, and skills in a content area, unit, and lesson. In addition, both instruction and assessment should have a central focus on student understanding, lessons planned for high student engagement, and a curriculum designed to teach up (that is, to begin with a curriculum that challenges advanced learners, and follow with plans to scaffold other students to enable them to work with that rich and powerful curriculum).

3. The teacher should persistently assess student status relative to the essential knowledge, understanding, and skills throughout a segment of study. Using assessment information to help the teacher and students understand a learner’s current proximity to essential knowledge, understanding, and skills is the compass for differentiation.

4. When ongoing assessment data indicate a student is confused, has learning gaps, or has already mastered essential knowledge, understanding, or skills, the teacher should use that information to plan upcoming instruction to move each learner ahead. The idea is to address those needs that, if left unattended, will most likely impede student growth.

5. In order to have the flexibility necessary to work differently with individual students at least some of the time, the teacher needs to guide students in understanding the nature and purpose of a differentiated classroom, work with them to establish and maintain effective norms for classroom operation, and manage classroom routines that balance the predictability and flexibility necessary to address a range of student differences.

When we look at differentiation in these terms, we see it is neither revolutionary nor something extra. It is simply teaching mindfully and with the intent to support the success of each human being for whom we accept professional responsibility. It moves us away from seeing and teaching students as a unit toward reflecting on and responding to them as individuals, as well as to the needs of the group as a whole.

Differentiation is neither revolutionary nor something extra. It is simply teaching mindfully and with the intent to support the success of each human being for whom we accept professional responsibility.

Differentiation, therefore, is not a particular set of strategies, but a way of thinking about teaching and learning. It provides a framework for planning and carrying out learner-focused instruction. While a substantial differentiation model will offer instructional tools and strategies that facilitate attention to varied learner needs, it will also counsel teachers to use approaches that work for their particular students, content, and strengths and proclivities as professionals.

A Model for Effective Differentiation

Figure 1.1 presents one model of differentiation (Tomlinson, 2014, 2017). Its five key components—(1) an invitational environment, (2) rich curriculum, (3) assessment to inform teaching and learning, (4) responsive instruction, and (5) leading students and managing routines—which we regard as the nonnegotiables of effective differentiation, will serve as the foundation for this book. The components are nonnegotiable in the sense that they stem from what we know about how people learn and how strong teachers teach. Each of the model’s components is part of an interdependent system of classroom elements, and thus when any one of them is weak, the other elements in the system will suffer. Classrooms in which all the elements work together effectively are classrooms likely to work for a broad range of learners. The remainder of this chapter briefly explains these five components, or non-negotiables, and the general support for them in brain research. The rest of the book explores, in greater detail, the nonnegotiables and the brain research that relates to them.

The model begins with the assertion that differentiation is a teacher’s response to learner needs. We are well aware that many teachers are very concerned about the impact of state, provincial, and curriculum standards; advanced placement or International Baccalaureate course requirements; and high-stakes testing on their instructional decisions and time. They worry about how they can address these concerns and still respond to the needs of diverse learners through differentiation. Many of the suggestions we offer do not require much additional time in planning and preparation because they should often replace rather than add to current instructional practices. In the end, instructional practices that promote greater learning for more students will both improve achievement scores and benefit the learners who take the tests.

Further, the model we discuss in this book asserts that a teacher’s belief about the capacity of each student to succeed with essential content affects everything in the classroom. Teachers who believe that some students are smart and some are not have little difficulty with the outcome when some students succeed academically and others do not. After all, they conclude, that’s just the way the world works. By contrast, teachers who believe that virtually all students can master important content as long as teachers support them and the students are willing to work hard enough draw a different conclusion. For those teachers, success is really the only acceptable outcome. Carol Dweck (2006) calls the first perspective a fixed mindset and the second a fluid or growth mindset. Teachers with a growth mindset believe it is their role to do what is necessary to be a catalyst for student success and also to enlist the student effort necessary for success. Differentiation calls on teachers to develop a growth mindset and ensure their students do so as well. We discuss teacher mindsets at length in chapter 2 (page 19).

Source: Adapted from The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners (2nd ed.), by Carol Ann Tomlinson. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. © 2014 by ASCD. Used with permission. Learn more about ASCD at www.ascd.org.

Figure 1.1: A model of differentiation.

The model delineates five key components that guide effective differentiation: (1) an invitational learning environment, (2) quality curriculum, (3) persistent formative assessment, (4) responsive instruction, and (5) leading students and managing flexible classroom routines. These components are integral to a classroom system in which all the parts work together to create peak learning and align with the core tenets of differentiation—each student is worthy of dignity and respect and should have access to the best learning opportunities a school can offer.

1. An invitational learning environment: The learning environment in a differentiated classroom needs to invite all kinds of learners to invest their best efforts to learn fully and deeply. This sort of learning environment requires teachers who see each of their students optimistically, understanding that all learners can, with appropriate support, achieve much more than they believe they can; foster meaningful teacher-student relationships; and have a sense of community in which every member is valued and supported in contributing to the success of individuals and the group as a whole.

2. Quality curriculum: What students are asked to learn (the curriculum) is rooted in the critical ideas of a topic or discipline. The curriculum itself reflects the teacher’s belief that everyone in the class is capable. It is designed to support student understanding rather than only recall. Goals for each step of the teaching-learning process are absolutely clear to teachers and students alike. Teachers plan lessons with high relevance to students and for high student engagement.

3. Persistent formative assessment to inform teaching and learning: Teachers use ongoing assessment to inform their instruction. With clarity at each stage of the learning process about what students should know, understand, and be able to do as a result of that segment, teachers use preassessment to understand where students are relative to essential goals as a unit begins. This allows the teacher to match instruction to student needs from the outset, including attending to gaps in prerequisite knowledge. Throughout a unit of study, the teacher persistently uses formative assessment to understand and help students understand who is progressing as he or she should be, who is confused or falling behind, and who is ready to move beyond the fundamental expectations for achievement. Using this continual and unfolding sense of each student’s relationship to critical outcomes, the teacher modifies instructional plans to attend to students’ varied strengths and needs with the goal of helping each student grow academically as effectively and efficiently as possible. The teacher also involves students in understanding their formative assessment outcomes so they can plan their own successful next steps.

4. Responsive instruction: Teachers use preassessment and formative assessment results to finalize instructional plans for the days ahead. It becomes clearer which students may be ready to work with more complex tasks, and which may need scaffolding or clarification in some aspect of the content. This is also a time when teachers can plan to link content to students’ interests so learning is more engaging, and to provide varied approaches to learning so students find learning more accessible and efficient.

5. Leading students and managing flexible classroom routines: In a classroom where teachers intend to work with individuals and small groups as well as with the class as a whole, it’s necessary to work together with students to design and implement classroom routines that provide both predictability and flexibility. Central in this process is helping students develop an understanding of what it means to design and create a class to work for each student—in other words, an understanding of differentiation. From that point, the teacher, with his or her student partners, can develop and implement routines that enable students to work successfully individually, in a variety of groupings, and as part of the class as a whole. It’s useful to think about the process of guiding a student-focused classroom in two parts: (1) leading students to understand the purpose and nature of differentiation, and (2) managing classroom routines.

The model of differentiation highlights four classroom elements teachers can modify in response to three categories of student need. Teachers can modify (1) content (what students will learn or how they will gain access to what they must learn), (2) process (activities students use to make sense of or come to own essential content), (3) product (how students demonstrate what they know, understand, and can do after extended periods of learning), and (4) affect (attention to students’ feelings and emotional needs) and learning environment (including both physical and affective contexts). Modifying these four elements makes room for student variance in the three areas of need: (1) readiness (proximity to learning goals), (2) interest (proclivities for particular ideas, topics, or skills), and (3) learning profile (preferences for approaches to or modes of learning). As teachers become more competent and confident in adapting content, process, product, and affect in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile, the likelihood of academic success and maximum student achievement grows exponentially (Tomlinson, 2017).

Finally, the model presents a variety of instructional strategies for teachers to address student variance. These approaches extend the capacity of the teacher to reach out to students differently when warranted, yet still keep virtually all learners focused on essential outcomes. Such strategies include small-group instruction, varying materials, learning contracts, tiers, expert groups, jigsaws, RAFTs, and many, many other methods. When teachers are comfortable with a wide range of instructional strategies, addressing students’ varied readiness levels, interests, and learning profiles is easier—just as building a house or a piece of furniture is easier with the right tools at hand.

Brain Research and Differentiation

We note earlier that some discoveries regarding how the brain learns substantially support the components of differentiation. Although we will discuss these discoveries more thoroughly in the ensuing chapters, here is a brief introduction to some basic principles about how we learn. Each of these principles is evident in the model of differentiation we use in this book—and in classrooms whose teachers are attuned and responsive to the inevitable diversity among today’s students.

• Each brain is uniquely organized: Even identical twins raised in the same environment view their world differently from each other as a result of their unique experiences and interpretations of how their world works. Although there are basic similarities in how we all learn, there are also important differences. We have individual preferences for how we learn, such as whether we prefer to learn alone or in groups, or by listening, observing, or participating, just to mention a few. These preferences constitute what may be called our own learning profile. Thus, the pervasive notion that one curricular, instructional, and assessment program fits all is hardly brain compatible.

• The brain is a lean pattern-making machine: One of the jobs of the brain’s frontal lobe—located just behind the forehead—is to determine whether incoming information has meaning for the individual. The frontal lobe does this mainly by looking for patterns. The more information the learner can acquire, the more likely that meaningful patterns will soon evolve. The brain is more apt to retain in long-term memory information that has meaning.

• The brain’s frontal lobe is often referred to as the executive center because it directs much of the brain’s activity: Its responsibilities include processing higher-order thinking and solving problems. The process of convergent thinking brings together information to solve a problem that generally has a single correct solution—like, for instance, most tasks in school and answers on tests. Few patterns result from this process because it often involves just rote memory. Divergent thinking, on the other hand, is a thought process that generates creative ideas by exploring different ways of solving problems. This process often leads to new ideas and concepts, producing novel patterns and expanding existing cognitive networks. Through differentiation, teachers can explore ways to help students become successful divergent thinkers.

• Emotions are processed in the brain’s limbic system and play an important role in pattern making: When information and patterns produce an emotional aha, chemicals are released that stimulate the brain’s reward system and keep us motivated to continue learning. However, racing through an overpacked curriculum in a classroom devoid of positive emotions to take a high-stakes test raises anxiety and releases chemicals that shut down the brain’s higher-order processing. The learner’s brain shifts from thinking, “This stuff is interesting,” to “How will I ever pass this test?” When tension is high, retention of learning is low. Differentiation offers students more rewarding learning opportunities.

• Learning is as much a social process as a cognitive one: Starting from childhood, we learn by observing others, most likely through the mechanism of our mirror neurons. These clusters of neurons fire not only when we experience a task or an emotion but also when we see someone else experience the same task or emotion. Students’ learning is shaped, too, by their groups’ practices and values. How much students participate in class activities, for instance, is often driven by how they think their peers will react if they give an incorrect answer. Self-concept plays a strong role in learning because most individuals tend to avoid situations that may result in failure. Constructive social interactions generate positive emotions and develop executive functions, thereby enhancing learning and retention. Differentiation helps ensure that constructive environment.

• We are learning a lot more about our memory systems: Why do students forget so much of what they have been taught? Apparently, we can carry information in working memory (a temporary memory where we do conscious processing) for an extended period of time. However, the information will eventually fade away if there is no meaningful reason for it to be retained in long-term memory. Could this explain why students can pass a test on a topic today but barely remember it three months later? Differentiation can include instructional strategies more likely to result in students’ remembering rather than in their discarding what they learn.

• Learning for retention requires focus and extended attention: Students in the 21st century have many demands on their attention, much of them from new and exciting technology. Because the brain is constantly searching for meaning, students will give their attention to what they find personally meaningful. And the more meaningful it is, the more engaged they will become. When students perceive a learning objective as lacking meaning, for whatever reason, their attention is likely to divert to more stimulating—and off-task—activities. Differentiation can tailor activities to meet individual student needs, thereby maintaining student engagement and focus.

• Technology is rewiring the young brain: Students in grades preK–12 are spending so much time with their digital devices that their brains are being rewired. This is due to brain plasticity, the ability of the brain to continually learn and reorganize itself as a result of input from its environment. Research studies are finding that this rewiring is having an effect on attention and memory systems, thinking-skills development, and social growth (Sousa, 2016). The extent of the effects will vary among students depending mainly on the amount of time they spend on their digital devices. Differentiation can vary the amount, frequency, and type of technology use among individual students.

All these insights into the learning process reaffirm how important it is for teachers to recognize individual student needs; create a curriculum that is relevant, engaging, and focused on understanding for their students; differentiate their instructional approaches; use assessments to inform teaching and learning; and provide rich, stimulating, brain-friendly, flexible classroom routines and productive classroom environments. We know more now about how the brain learns, and we should adjust our educational practices accordingly.

Differentiation in a Nutshell

Effective differentiation does not call on a teacher to be all things to every student at all times of the day. Rather, it calls on teachers to be consistently mindful of three things: (1) how they structure their content for meaning and authenticity, (2) who their students are as individuals, and (3) how to use classroom elements flexibly to give themselves degrees of freedom in connecting content and learners. It is our belief that classroom practice and pedagogy research has long supported this approach to teaching. We also believe our new and growing understanding of how the brain develops and learns contributes to the case for quality differentiation.

A Better Scenario

Mrs. Worrell looked at the students as they left her room at the end of a reasonably typical school day at the end of the first week of school. She knew some of the students couldn’t wait to leave the room and others would happily stay on for a longer day. She knew some of the students had understood the ideas they explored that day, others had not, and some had known the content before she began teaching it to them. She knew their lives at home ran the gamut from comfortable and supportive to overly demanding to chaotic to abusive. She knew some of the students flourished when they worked with peers and others preferred working alone—or had no one they could call a friend.

In those students, she saw herself as a young learner—shy, uncertain, and eager to please. She saw her son, who often learned faster than his age-mates and who got weary of waiting for others to learn what he already knew. She saw her daughter, who often needed extra time to learn and who learned best when someone could show her how something worked rather than simply tell her. She knew she needed to create a classroom where there was room for each student to succeed. She wasn’t sure exactly how to do that, but she had some good hunches and the determination to follow them. She was excited to see a new school week begin.