Last week during #sunchat I tweeted, “We cannot keep
differentiating instruction and standardizing assessments. No continuity or
transparency for students or parents.” After being favorited, retweeted, and
discussed, Jeffrey Farley (@FarleyJeffrey) asked, “Which practice leads to a
more authentic learning paradigm-differentiation or standardization?” To which
I asked for a little time to ponder that thought. After thoughtful
consideration I’ve decided that my answer cannot be contained to 140 words,
much less 140 characters.
In order to answer that question, one must understand that I
believe wholeheartedly that we must educate EVERY student in a way that
prepares him for college. No exceptions, no exclusions and no fine print. This is
not making a declaration that all students WILL go to college. It is just a
statement of belief that says I will not decide which students will or will not
have the prior education necessary to excel if they so choose to attend
college. It is by no mistake that our district’s mission and our school’s
vision fall right in line with this belief.
With that in mind, I will step out on a limb and say that
high standards are not the problem. I believe we need to hold everyone to high
standards, starting with the adults in our building but trickling down to all
students. How we assess those standards, now that is a problem. Standardization
of assessments is problematic, but I believe it is necessitated by the desire
for accountability. We want to know that our students know concepts and content
without assistance. But isn’t assistance part of real world working and
learning? I’ve never been reprimanded for asking a colleague or my supervisor
for assistance. But on test day we only want to see what students know in
isolation. We do not take into account that as college students or adults they
will have technology and human resources at their fingertips. I do not feel
that standardized assessments are the root of all evil, but like everything
else, they need to be made relevant.
Differentiation occurs when we take the learner’s prior
knowledge, readiness, learning style, and interest into account and act
accordingly. Differentiating instruction to meet the needs of learners is an
important process that great teachers utilize. Do I think we may be taking
differentiation a little too far, definitely. We are differentiating so much,
with the best intentions, that we water down the curriculum to a point that
mastery is easily attained without a challenge. Differentiation was not
designed to make content less difficult, but to provide the content in a way
that gave students the opportunity to rise to the challenge.
In all actuality, the
students who will be most successful are not those who have all of the answers,
but those that have the perseverance it takes to find the answers. The time is
now to equip students with the thinking skills necessary to create their own
solutions when the answer is not readily available.
In answer to the initial question, “Which practice leads to
a more authentic learning paradigm-differentiation or standardization,” my
answer is neither. I do not think that an authentic learning paradigm can be
boxed into a buzz word or catch phrase. Authentic learning is as different for
each teacher as it is for each student. We must create classrooms that foster a
love of learning while always inspiring students to create and share their
learning globally. That is a real paradigm shift.
In case you didn't see the tweet last night, I could not fit my reply in this comment box, so I published it here: http://farleythroes.blogspot.com/2014/03/differentiation-vs-standardization-reply.html
ReplyDeleteNow that the day is new and the sun is shining again, I want you to know that my response is not necessarily an argument against what you say here. Rather, it is an argument in favor of never giving up on the need to see each of our children as individuals and to teach them as such (as you conclude, also, in your post). There has been a lot of chatter about whether differentiation waters down curriculum standards, and I continue to feel that, when it is done well, it does not. If more professional development is needed in order for teachers to differentiate well and keep curriculum standards at the forefront of their mission, then that must become our charge as leaders.
Jenn I am first compelled to say that I enjoy the passion with which you write. You bring up a couple of very good points....1) "Differentiation was not designed to make content less difficult, but to provide the content in a way that gave students the opportunity to rise to the challenge" and 2) "We must create classrooms that foster a love of learning".
ReplyDeleteDifferentiation is key to fostering the love of learning. It meets each student at his/her level of readiness and provides tools for him/her to grow. It allows each student to feel valued as a learner. No longer is a learner inadequate nor can a learner plateau...learning is a continuum for all.
However I am concerned with the statement that says "We are differentiating so much, with the best intentions, that we water down the curriculum to a point that mastery is easily attained without a challenge."
I agree with Jeffrey, for teachers that are watering down curriculum this is not differentiating; this is lowering the standards. Individuals doing so need PD on DI in order to truly uphold the intent of DI...which as you so eloquently pointed out is " to provide the content in a way that" gives "students the opportunity to rise to the challenge"...from struggling to advanced learners.
As for testing, we cannot keep creating tests without scaffolding for levels of readiness or else we lack a true picture of what our learners know and can do. We cannot keep assigning grades without defining what learners should know and be able to do for each letter/number grade given...but alas that is another can of worms.
Thank you for your willingness to reflect, create and bravely share with us all!