Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction



Not necessarily. Within each of those classes, you have english learners,
kids with reading disabilities, kids who had good middle school teachers,
kids who did not have good middle school teachers, kids with ADHD, kids with
social problems, and kids who just take longer to learn a concept. That's
where the differentiation comes in.

You will not find a reputable reference anywhere that says that tracking is
the same as differentiation. It is possible that differentiation is being
done in each of these classes, but just separating them is not
differentiation. I won't even get into the research on tracking.

M. Horton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Keller" <PKeller@holmdelschools.org>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction


My school teaches three levels of first year physics: Honors, Regular and
"Principles". These groups correspond to Tomlinson's challenged, average
and gifted. Each of these classes has its own curriculum,has different
lessons and different labs, takes different tests...in other words is
differentiated by content, process and product.

So in my continuing attempt to understand how to apply this in a high school
physics class, now I'm asking if earlier posts had it right: by separating
our students this way, are we already meeting the goal of differentiating
instruction as defined by experts such as Carol Ann Tomlinson?
________________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of M. Horton
[scitch@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 1:03 AM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction

Here is Dr. Tracy Hall's definition,
"Definition
To differentiate instruction is to recognize students varying background
knowledge, readiness, language, preferences in learning, interests, and to
react responsively. Differentiated instruction is a process to approach
teaching and learning for students of differing abilities in the same class.
The intent of differentiating instruction is to maximize each student's
growth and individual success by meeting each student where he or she is,
and assisting in the learning process."

http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_diffinstruc.html

Here is a paraphrase of Carol Ann Tomlinson's definition:

"Define it - what is it?

On a simple level, differentiated instruction is teaching with student
variance in mind. It means starting where the kids are rather than adopting
a standardized approach to teaching that seems to presume that all learners
of a given age or grade are essentially alike. Thus differentiated
instruction is "responsive" teaching rather than "one-size-fits-all"
teaching.

A fuller definition of differentiated instruction is that a teacher
proactively plans varied approaches to what students need to learn, how they
will learn it, and/or how they can express what they have learned in order
to increase the likelihood that each student will learn as much as he or she
can as efficiently as possible. (Tomlinson, 2003, p. 151)"

http://webhost.bridgew.edu/kdobush/Strategies%20for%20Teaching%20Reading/Handbook/Diff_Inst/Differentiated%20Instruction.htm

As you can see from the "How does it work?" chart on this page, Carol Ann
Tomlinson breaks up her differentiated lessons for "Challenged", "Average",
and "Gifted" students, not "visual learners", "kinesthetic learners", etc.
For each of those groups, she recommends different content, process, and
products. Other researchers also suggest differentiating questioning in the
classroom as well.

Here's a quote from Dr. John J. Hoover and James R. Patton EdD, "The need to
differentiate or adapt curriculum and instruction to meet special needs
continues to challenge educators of students with high-incidence
disabilities. The current emphasis on teaching and assessing standards
requires knowledge and skills to differentiate standards-based education to
successfully meet diverse needs in the classroom."

http://www.redorbit.com/news/display?id=48608

D. Laurence-Brown says, "

Suggestions presented pay specific attention to the following issues that
remain troublesome for many teachers:

· Making multilevel instructional decisions (e.g., who learns at what
level?) in a way that is manageable within a standards-based instructional
context.

· Devising additional supports for struggling learners, especially
resources that can be provided with or without additional staff assigned to
the general education classroom.

· Providing an appropriate education for students with special gifts and
talents and for students with severe disabilities, who both may be members
of the same heterogeneous, inclusive classrooms.

· Differentiating primarily within whole-class lessons, avoiding separate,
parallel tasks as much as possible."





M. Horton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Uretsky" <jlu@hep.anl.gov>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction


Hi all-
What I'm trying to find out is "What is the basis (in terms of a
specific identifiable source) for the first sentence of Horton's post? Or
is it just one mores conjecture?
Regards,
Jack

"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley




On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, M. Horton wrote:

Differentiated instruction has nothing to do with the non-research-based
idea of learning styles. It has to do with different levels of background
knowledge, different levels of prerequisite skills, differences in
language
abilities, and differences in learning disabilities. At least in Southern
California, every classroom has at least one English Learner and one
mainstreamed special education student. They are generally the targets
for
differentiation, but every student eventually will need extra support.

There are dozens of books, hundreds of articles, and plenty of workshops
on
the subject for those who really want to know what it means. But they
won't
help those whose question is just a symptom of their resistance to change.

M. Horton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Keller" <PKeller@holmdelschools.org>
To: "Forum for Physics Educators" <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction


So when I teach my first-year students to find instantaneous velocity by
finding the slope of a tangent line, I am already meeting the district
objective.

Seriously, I do think that this particular educational buzz word means
that
different students are to be taught differently and that the "shotgun"
approach does not qualify. It seems that this idea, like many others in
education, comes up from elementary school and is then imposed at the high
school level where it does not make practical sense. If I taught the same
25 students all day, I'd feel it was reasonable to get to know their
learning styles and to sometimes adapt lessons to accommodate them. But I
teach 100 a day, 43 minutes each...

The idea behind my second question is this. Say we accept that there are
many ways to teach. And that each student has a method in which they are
most able to learn. It might be the case that more physics will be
learned
if we adjust the methods to match the student's preferred mode. But it
might be BETTER to continue to present many methods to all (call it
"shotgun" if you like) and then help each student to get something from
each of them.
________________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Jack Uretsky
[jlu@hep.anl.gov]
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 8:28 AM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] differentiated instruction

Hi all-
So why not get a course description from Mr. Warmell before
trying to conjecture his meaning. Maybe "differeniation" refers to t he
mathemtical process of finding the derivative of a function.
Regards,
Jack

"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley




On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, Bernard Cleyet wrote:

You all received the course announcement?



Now Available!

Learn how to integrate differentiated instruction, assessment and
grading

with

Rick Wormeli's new course - Differentiation and Assessment for
Middle Schools


http://view.exacttarget.com/?
j=fe831d78716d0d7974&m=fef21373736d00&ls=fdf215797162037977177272&l=fe99
15707c64017f70&s=fe29107072620474741679&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe401d797d6300747d1
d&r=0


bc thinks another bureaucratic fashion hype.



On 2009, Sep 25, , at 10:21, Philip Keller wrote:

Hello all,

OK, maybe Friday afternoon is not the time to open up this can of
worms, but...

My district school goals include differentiated instruction. I
have been to a couple of workshops but I have some questions that I
was wondering if anyone here can help me with:

1. If I say "I am going to use differentiated instruction in my
high school physics class," what exactly am I planning to do? I
assume that it means more than "I am going to teach different ways
at different times." I've read that it includes differentiating
based on content, process and product. My course has only one
official approved curriculum. How do I vary the content and how do
I choose who gets what? Right now, I use a variety of different
teaching methods, but I do not "differentiate". Everyone has to
listen to a lecture. Everyone has to play with a simulation.
Everyone has to do an experiment. Everyone has to work on problems
to solve. So, as I said, I am teaching different ways, but I
suspect (hope?) that differentiating means more. Then, if I
differentiate "product", who decides which kids produce which kind
of evidence of learning? Won't everyone want the perceived easiest
option?

OK, that was my first question. Next:

2. Once I know what it is that I am planning on doing, how do I
answer if I am asked: "Do you have evidence that shows that this
is a good idea?"

Thank you for any ideas or references you may have. Have a good
weekend.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l