Differentiation as a pedagogical practice has always made sense to me. After Lida Winfield’s performance this summer, however, differentiation really started to matter to me. I’ve generally been empathetic, patient, and kind with my students, but this year I find myself stopping mid-thought (mid-frustration, sometimes) and remembering that “we all want to swim.” As my mind shifts to the swimming metaphor, the next steps become obvious. What does this kid need to stop feeling like she is drowning? What kind of support would help this student make even a smidge of progress so that he can leave this class feeling some sense of movement? How can I shift what I’m doing so that this student stops feeling stupid?
(As an important aside...I find it difficult to separate thoughts about “differentiation” from those about “articulation.” The way I design and use scales is directly tied to the formative assessments I give and the instructional adjustments I make. Thus, I’ve chosen to include movement (below) in the “differentiation” section because creating opportunities for kids to experience movement is, in my opinion, one of the reasons that differentiation matters.)
According to James Zull, movement is a critical component of the learning process. Students experience movement in a variety of ways, including during the “practice/feedback/reflection/adjustment/practice again” loop, when students will hopefully make incremental progress (or even big jumps) that they can identify and track using scales and teacher feedback. Part of the reason that this type of movement is so important is that as students move toward a goal (practice) and get feedback on it, they activate a part of the brain that generates a feeling of pleasure. However, if students aren’t making progress, don’t get useful feedback, or are unable to apply the feedback/reflection step to make an appropriate adjustment, then the pleasurable feeling is absent. (However, Zull notes that this sensation occurs in active learning situations. Unfortunately, on my scales, active learning generally begins after level 1. Level 1 usually asks students to demonstrate simple identification that sounds more like passive learning.)
I thought a lot about movement during a course this spring. One of the strategies I came up with during the course was a tracking sheet that had a space for reflection. It’s not a novel strategy or tool, but it’s one that makes a lot of sense to me and creates a space for students to reflect every time they receive feedback on a formative assessment. In class, I’ve been trying to use “reflection/adjustment” language with kids to help them begin to understand the purpose of feedback and reflection.
Finally, just as as students are using formative feedback to make meaningful adjustments, I too am learning to apply formative feedback to plan lessons.
For example, based on observations, practice, and standardized test scores, we identified certain students who would have a hard time identifying/recording evidence through various types of input (video, reading, lecture). When we wanted to assess their ability to use evidence to support a lead in a piece of writing, we gave those students a short list of leads and a list of evidence that they could choose from. By identifying the real purpose of the assessment (writing: evidence) and applying what we knew about kids, we could design a formative that was appropriately-challenging and included necessary supports.
I also applied formative information to create a more appropriate follow-up assessment related to the themes of geography. After the first formative, I realized that students’ ability to apply the themes might be distinct from their ability to remember the five themes, and that some of them might be getting hung up on the one theme that they couldn’t remember rather than skipping and moving on. The change I made between the first and second formative was to include a space for students to list the five themes. I circulated and, when I noticed that a student didn’t have all five listed, asked the student if they wanted to continue to try to remember the one or two “missing” themes or to get all the themes and move on to the application piece. Although this makes for tricky assessment (is the student a 1 or a 3?), it allowed me to pinpoint the stuck-point and target instruction more precisely.
Linked below are several documents, including: (1) summative assessments from two units; (2) three formative assessments that include targets (all are meant to be on half-sheets), including a differentiated writing assessment and the two geography formatives that changed based on student performance on the first practice; and (3) the tracking/reflection sheet that students have been using in humanities.
(As an important aside...I find it difficult to separate thoughts about “differentiation” from those about “articulation.” The way I design and use scales is directly tied to the formative assessments I give and the instructional adjustments I make. Thus, I’ve chosen to include movement (below) in the “differentiation” section because creating opportunities for kids to experience movement is, in my opinion, one of the reasons that differentiation matters.)
According to James Zull, movement is a critical component of the learning process. Students experience movement in a variety of ways, including during the “practice/feedback/reflection/adjustment/practice again” loop, when students will hopefully make incremental progress (or even big jumps) that they can identify and track using scales and teacher feedback. Part of the reason that this type of movement is so important is that as students move toward a goal (practice) and get feedback on it, they activate a part of the brain that generates a feeling of pleasure. However, if students aren’t making progress, don’t get useful feedback, or are unable to apply the feedback/reflection step to make an appropriate adjustment, then the pleasurable feeling is absent. (However, Zull notes that this sensation occurs in active learning situations. Unfortunately, on my scales, active learning generally begins after level 1. Level 1 usually asks students to demonstrate simple identification that sounds more like passive learning.)
I thought a lot about movement during a course this spring. One of the strategies I came up with during the course was a tracking sheet that had a space for reflection. It’s not a novel strategy or tool, but it’s one that makes a lot of sense to me and creates a space for students to reflect every time they receive feedback on a formative assessment. In class, I’ve been trying to use “reflection/adjustment” language with kids to help them begin to understand the purpose of feedback and reflection.
Finally, just as as students are using formative feedback to make meaningful adjustments, I too am learning to apply formative feedback to plan lessons.
For example, based on observations, practice, and standardized test scores, we identified certain students who would have a hard time identifying/recording evidence through various types of input (video, reading, lecture). When we wanted to assess their ability to use evidence to support a lead in a piece of writing, we gave those students a short list of leads and a list of evidence that they could choose from. By identifying the real purpose of the assessment (writing: evidence) and applying what we knew about kids, we could design a formative that was appropriately-challenging and included necessary supports.
I also applied formative information to create a more appropriate follow-up assessment related to the themes of geography. After the first formative, I realized that students’ ability to apply the themes might be distinct from their ability to remember the five themes, and that some of them might be getting hung up on the one theme that they couldn’t remember rather than skipping and moving on. The change I made between the first and second formative was to include a space for students to list the five themes. I circulated and, when I noticed that a student didn’t have all five listed, asked the student if they wanted to continue to try to remember the one or two “missing” themes or to get all the themes and move on to the application piece. Although this makes for tricky assessment (is the student a 1 or a 3?), it allowed me to pinpoint the stuck-point and target instruction more precisely.
Linked below are several documents, including: (1) summative assessments from two units; (2) three formative assessments that include targets (all are meant to be on half-sheets), including a differentiated writing assessment and the two geography formatives that changed based on student performance on the first practice; and (3) the tracking/reflection sheet that students have been using in humanities.
FEEDBACK TARGET
Tracking Sheet
Tracking Sheet
1. A description of what you have included
2. Links to the evidence
2. Links to the evidence