Hi! If we start in the ideal situation that never is the case: the teacher meets a group of very similar students, all with expected pre-knowledge, being taught the same stuff in the same way with the same results in a defined time, so they can happily proceed to the next course.
This rarely happens, we all know it — and we are told to differentiate and personalise instruction by providing choice, a variety of resources, group work and small group instruction, students teaching eachother, more asynchronous learning resources, individual study plans, etc.
However, in todays system this demands the teacher to process too much learner information when also trying to teach, and the preparations become too massive Also for the most experienced and effective teacher. But what are we trying to do? Save the situation that is caused by the ”one-size-fits-all” idea, a system failure that compensates for learners individuality In pre-existing conditions, pre-knowledge,, pace of learning, interest, motivation?
Why not turn it all around? Technology is soon mature for taking help of learning analytics supporting adaptive learning. Learning starts where the learner is, gaps in an individuals pre-knowledge must be identified and adressed, the next challenge a student meets should be just enough of a challenge, not so difficult that he gives it all up, not so easy that he gets bored. Flow in learning is optimised, by letting learning be constant and time variable instead of the other way around. Not all teaching/learning must be like this, but a part. Group work can then be formed based on learning analytics, not randomly. Personal feedback from the teacher is always needed of course. But with adaptive learning, school organisation will change a lot, since people learn at different pace. In the longer perspective, conventional summative assessment can become less and less important and replaced by formative assessment. Even the organisation of content in courses van become obsolete, when information-processing ICTs are wisely used.
Muhammad Amjad, I am simply asking names of international researchers who are interested in differentiation in education, such as curriculum differentiation or assessment differentiation.
Anders Norberg, I beg your pardon if I did not understand you well, but my situation is a bit different. I am trying to understand the concept of differentiation at schools, considering a context in which you have 40-50 students in a classroom, schools in precarious situations (in some of them, there is no toilet paper for students). In addition, thinking about Brazil, a country with more than 20 million students, simply replicating designs or algorithms does not work. The regional contexts are so different that even the mass-scale tests applied here may be different according to the region. I just need help finding different references on the topic, and if it is the case you have some of yours, I would be glad to read them.
Differentiated instruction and assessment, also known as differentiated learning or, in education, simply, differentiation, is a framework or philosophy for effective teaching that involves providing
That's an interesting topic. You might need to check the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference). It describes language abilities on a six-point scale (A1-A2-B1-B2-C1-C2). This facilitates differentiation. Also, you might need to think of teachers' roles as decision-makers. Teaching in large classes, etc.
When it comes to curriculum differentiation, there are several areas to look at to include: input, task, outcome, output, response, resources or support. Each focus requires a variety of approaches.
The differentiation of education can be seen from the implementation, process, and much more vary to the differentiation of curriculum design, structure, learning outcomes, program outcomes,and performance standard as culminating output.
Hi! You might find these materials useful. Thanks!
Tirri, K., & Uusikylä, K. (1994). How teachers perceive differentiation of education among the gifted and talented. Gifted and Talented International, 9(2), 69-73.