I have some sort of allergy to buzz words these days. It's not their core concepts, necessarily, but something in their vagueness and misinterpretation. And, in the land of buzzwords, differentiation is the king. At some point in history, someone developed the concept of differentiation, and it was a clearly defined, highly practical concept which hoards of people bought into. But over the years, it lost it's hard lines and features. It got shoved into our minds as a vague concept we like, or groan at, but it's lost many of it's more distinguishable features. And this was done to the point where the current understanding of differentiation shares as many characteristics of it's core concept as a balloon animal of a dog shares with an actual dog.
The true heart of differentiation - the one that's been overlooked in light of other reactive practices and theories - is that all students are natural learners. As John Abbott puts it, all of them, "naturally observe, deconstruct, piece together and create their own knowledge." Often, students are missed not because they can't learn, but because instruction isn't built for all student to be able to learn, rather it's traditionally built for efficiency. So, we try and flex or bend students to our instruction rather than build our instruction with the learners in mind. This is a problem. It's a problem because the former isn't differentiation and the latter seems difficult. Maybe the question isn't "How do we differentiate instruction for all students," but rather "In what ways can we design our instruction to provide opportunities for all students to learn?" It's proactive, not reactive.
So, what now...?
There are methods and strategies for this approach, but it requires us as teachers to relinquish our reigns a bit. Opening up learning for all students isn't always efficient; this pathway doesn't always allow us to be the sole providers of all wisdom and knowledge in our classrooms. Plus, we can't always work within the time constraints we have (or perceive we have). In order to allow students to explore the required content, students need room to construct their own knowledge. Here's some ways to design learning to better suit all learners:
Encourage student questioning
Education is less about learning facts. The internet has made sure of that. Rather, it's about developing learning skills that allow students to become resourceful and self-reliant learners, creators and innovators. It's the ole "teach a man to fish" adage. Project-Based Learning & Inquiry-Based Learning provides very flexible frameworks for students to develop a deep understanding of core concepts while applying them in meaningful ways. Additionally, The Right Question Institute's Question Formulation Technique is a brilliant way to teach students how to generate deep and meaningful questions.
Creative Design
Almost a year ago, after doing some research into creativity and critical thinking in the classroom, I began referring to creativity as "creative design". Creativity refers to open expression, whereas "creative design" implies students are developing and innovating unique approaches to challenges. Does it really matter whether a student writes an essay, designs an infographic or edits a short film, as long as in demonstrates the skills and understanding you're looking for? How okay are we with the notion that students may land on a different conclusion than we anticipate or chooses unconventional approaches to common challenges? Which leads me to...
Student Choice
Should the students create infographics or videos to demonstrate their understanding? Create eBooks or virtual tours? The answer to that question is less important that providing them the opportunity to creatively design their own unique solution to the problem or challenge presented. Luckily, Google Apps for Education, along with an ever-growing toolbox of online resources, provide ample options for students to really branch out and innovate.
Collaboration
On the topic of buzz words, collaboration is quickly rising to the top. But, this doesn't mean (or always mean) group work. Rather, collaboration is what happens when one good idea meets another good idea and turns into a great idea. One of the practical ways this can be done in the classroom is allowing students to work in tandem, or tandem groups. This is when students are encouraged to work alongside other students, but on independent activities, bouncing ideas off one another, which can greatly improve creative design-based projects and activities. I've seen this most successfully done when students are working on similar, but not identical, projects or topics or when students are brainstorming. Just like adults, students don't always benefit from creating in isolation. And, just like our PLCs, great ideas come from focused, supportive groups.
Let students actively control the information rather than passively receive it
We've been steadily moving out of the "I teach, you listen" model of instruction (though I'd argue it still has its place, if not just limited). In this model, it's our information we're disseminating to our students. But, if we use strategies to allow students to discover the same information under our coaching and guidance, the students become owners of their own knowledge. (Doesn't that just sound right?) This can be and has been done in every content area from Social Studies to Math. Heck, this is the cornerstone of Science's new NGSS standards!
Consider the Design Thinking model when planning lessons
As a building, we haven't delved into Design Thinking, yet, but it's on the horizon. Based off of Standford's d.school, it's a big concept that takes time to learn and practice, but, at its core, the focus is on the user experience of the things we design. In an educational lens, this could mean thinking about our young learners - really thinking about them - when we design our curriculum, instruction and learning environment.
No comments:
Post a Comment