Differentiated Instruction and Multiple Intelligences

Your students will bring their personal experiences, backgrounds, and distinct personalities with them every day of the school year. This means that in one classroom, you will be trying to meet a broad range of learning needs, and to successfully integrate individuals within one collective unit. Talk about rigor! Understanding the meaning and implications of Differentiated Instruction can serve you extremely well as you seek and utilize ways to incorporate it. In Differentiated Instruction, a teacher varies the content (what), process (how), or product (demonstration of learning) of instruction to enhance student understanding.

So, when we introduce content to our students, we provide the same information, but we then vary the methods and tools for building students’ understanding based on what we know about their personal experiences, backgrounds, and personalities. We want to reach each learner in the most effective manner possible. This does not mean that we deny anyone the opportunity to see something a certain way; rather, we use what they already know and in what they are interested as starting blocks for engaging learners and encouraging their growth.

One way to differentiate instruction is by incorporating Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences within planning, instruction, and assessment. Gardner’s theory essentially suggests that everyone has given strengths pertaining to how they function most successfully as learners. These strengths may be a result of prior experiences, background knowledge, or interests—further supporting the importance of getting to know each one of your students well. By creating lessons that touch upon diverse learning styles, you make material more accessible to all of your students.

This doesn't mean you have to create 36 different lessons for 36 students. One of my favorite strategies is to use a tic-tac-toe grid for an instructional unit. I create a variety of activities geared toward multiple intelligences, and students choose three to create tic-tac-toe. Instant differentiation and the personal choice builds ownership!

Were you already familiar with this information? What do you think about it? Do you ever use it in your classroom? If this information is new to you, what are your thoughts, based upon your experiences and your students?

School Schedules

Are you planning next year's schedule? My friend and co-author Ron Williamson wrote a great article on scheduling. Take a look!

Questioning Levels

In my last blog, we discussed the relationship of rigor and CIA (curriculum, instruction, and assessment). Now, we will delve a bit more into how to approach instruction. Research has suggested three key areas to consider: Levels of Questioning, Differentiated Instruction, and Multiple Intelligences. We’ll focus first on Levels of Questioning.

Levels of Questioning

How do you think that Levels of Questioning either enhances or detracts from instruction? What purpose do Levels of Questioning serve throughout instruction? When you are learning about a new concept or even learning how to physically do something, asking and being asked certain kinds of questions can help you to more efficiently and accurately acquire the given knowledge or skill. The ultimate goal is to develop and build understanding. Questions—the right kinds of questions in the proper sequence—are crucial for getting a firm grasp of something, for monitoring one’s progression, and for becoming more adept at further inquiry.

In Rigor is NOT a Four-Letter Word, I compare understanding to climbing a mountain. You may have to start at the bottom, but to get the full view (the rigorous view), you have to make it to the top. You climb to the top one step at a time; the steps become increasingly more difficult as you go, but the view is worth it.

One model I like is Ciardello's four types of questions ("Did You Ask a Good Question Today?" Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 42, no. 3, November, 1998):

Memory Questions.

Focus on: identifying, naming, defining, identifying, designating, yes or no responses

Keywords: who, what, where, when

Convergent Thinking

Focus on: explaining, stating relationships, comparing and contrasting

Keywords: why, how, in what way

Examples:

	Explaining: What were some reasons for the US Civil War?
	Stating relationships: How does the enforcement of intellectual property rights encourage technological development?
	Comparing and contrasting: In what ways are spreadsheets and databases alike? In what ways do they differ?

Divergent Thinking

Focus on: predicting, hypothesizing, inferring, reconstruction

Keywords: imagine, suppose, predict, if... then..., how might... can you create..., what are some possible consequences...

Examples:

	Predicting: What predictions can you make if the population continues to grow and less land is devoted to agriculture?
	Hypothesizing: If the Axis forces had won World War II, how might the world be different?
	Inferring: What would you expect to happen if intellectual property rights were all repealed?
	Reconstruction: What would you suggest to increase recreational opportunities in Wisconsin's traditional resort and vacation industries?

Evaluative Thinking

Focus on: valuing, judging, defending, justifying choices

Keywords: defend, judge, justify, what do you think..., what is your opinion...

Examples:

	Valuing: How do you feel about the role of competition in the US marketplace?
	Judging: What do you think of relaxing of immigration laws and amnesty for illegal immigrants?
	Defending: Why do you oppose the construction of a nuclear power plant in our community?
	Justifying choices: Why would you prefer to attend a private college?

Do you have a method for developing questions during your instruction? If so, what is it? Which of the three models do you think would most benefit you in terms of improving the kinds of questions you develop, and your ability to do so?

C. I. A. and Rigor

Rigor- Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment

C.I.A. Not the Central Intelligence Agency, although I’m sure that as teachers, the task of implementing rigor can often seem as challenging as taking on a mission for the C.I.A. In this case, however, these three letters represent three components that must be present and working together in a fluid and balanced manner in order for true rigor to be present. Curriculum. Instruction. Assessment. What one teaches, how one engages students as active learners, and the methods one uses to determine how well students can apply that which they have learned. Despite their individual meanings, Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment are like three parts of one whole, all necessary and all creating a sort of cyclical yet non-directional system in order for the whole to function as intended.

How can the relationship between Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment be both cyclical and non-directional?

Let’s look first at the non-directional nature: Often, while one is instructing, one realizes that a key piece of information must be revisited, and therefore switches back to determining content and order (i.e., curriculum) of instruction. Furthermore, perhaps an assessment has played a pivotal role in one’s decision to revisit the content matter and order. Certainly, as part of instruction, teachers must provide authentic, specific, and ongoing assessments in order to inform instructional methods and content matter, including order, pacing, grouping, etc. If our assessment(s) reveal(s) gaps in students’ understanding, we may have to revisit the Instruction phase, or even the Curriculum phase.

Now, the cyclical nature seems quite logical: Determine what to teach and in what order (Curriculum), develop how to teach the content so that students are active and involved participants rather than passive recipients (Instruction), and continually monitor how well students understand and apply the information and ideas (Assessment). THEN, use data compiled from assessment to restart the process of determining what to teach next, how to teach it, how to assess, and so on and so on.

Finally, within this interwoven C.I.A. relationship, high expectations must be consistently upheld. Learners thrive under challenging conditions in which they have access to the tools, strategies, and skills to manage content matter. Additionally, they thrive when the person guiding their learning expresses sincere belief in their abilities to succeed.

Because I am a firm believer in the effectiveness of graphic organizers, I want to challenge you now to develop a graphic organizer that models the relationship between high expectations, curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Remember that this relationship results in and from the key element for which we are striving: Rigor.

A special thank you to Ginny Ramirez Del-Toro for her thoughts that led to this blog!

Does Classroom Arrangement Matter?

From one of my workshop participants, Kate: “How should you arrange the classroom (ie-teacher’s desk) to promote community…or does it matter?”

I'm not a big believer in "one" right way to do something, but it does make a difference. For example, the standard room with desks in a row and the teacher's desk front and center sends a message that the teacher is in charge, and the students are simply recipients of information. However, I was in a classroom set up like this, and it was a community, mainly because the teacher was never at his desk; he was always in the middle of his students, who also had flexibility to rearrange the desks. That's what is more important--do students feel like they are a part of things, or separate from the teacher? In my classroom, I tend to find that clustering desks/tables works better for me so I can facilitate groups. In my grad classes, though, if I had a small group (8-12), I tended to do a large, square U so everyone is together. In that instance, clusters of tables actually breaks community rather than building it.

Great Resource!

You can receive strategies from my books and other books from my publisher Eye On Education in your Inbox. Click here to sign up for their e-newsletters: http://www.eyeoneducation.com/newsletter_request.asp

My Foundational Beliefs about Teaching

Try to think of a time when you or someone you knew, or about whom you read, thrived under conditions that did not challenge them. The two ideas essentially negate each other because in order to thrive, people must be challenged. In addition, however, they must have the necessary skills and belief in their abilities to use those skills in order to thrive. This is the idea behind rigor in the classroom. When teachers combine high expectations with genuine belief and solid instruction, students perceive that they are capable of excelling and achieving, and they readily welcome rigor. Throughout my experiences as en educator, I have learned countless valuable lessons, among them:
- An individual teacher can exert immense influence over students just by holding them to high standards, and believing in them.
- Students reflect our perspectives of them. Much like the idea of self-fulfilling prophecies, students will attain success at whatever levels they perceive that others—particularly their teachers—believe they are capable of doing so.
- As teachers, we must focus on what we can control. By virtue of our humanity, this tends to be a difficult frame of mind to adopt. However, it is vastly wise in its simplicity. Avoid becoming a victim to circumstances beyond your reach or control. Instead, learn how to seek and create alternate options and possibilities. This kind of level-headed persistence and determination can help you meet your students’ needs, your students’ parents’ needs, and you own needs.