It is a mistake to confuse differentiated instruction with differentiated curriculum. At grad school level, while there are not year-end exams, there is a common curriculum, with grades assessed for each class. This does not mean that we are all learning in the same way, or that we entered with identical knowledge.

I’m with you regarding science and social studies. While my daughter had these subjects in elementary school, my son received a different curriculum in his “special” classes. Science and social studies were considered distractors from learning reading and math. While reading progressed annually for my son, mathematics was a case of endless repetitions of the same content (using the same instructional methods) that hadn’t been mastered previously.

I only have one grade level in my classroom. The kids in there are so varied in ability and background that I can’t imagine trying to teach more. Our district often does “splits” of 2 grade-levels, but all students put in those classes are solid middle-level kids with no behavior problems.

I differentiate homework for groups of students in my classroom. For example, gifted math students don’t need the “busywork” of just doing more of the same problems, and low students often need reinforcement of old skills–because if they try to do the current work at home, they can’t do it. Also, kids who have disabilities might have completely different homework based on their IEP’s or 504′s. If a child needs remedial skills in reading, I may assign that child homework based on that rather than having the regular homework other children have. And so on…

Yes, grade levels are an artificial construct, but so are grades. I think it is reasonable to assume/expect that when a child has passed a grade they have acquired some nontrivial amount of knowledge.

Well, my kids go to a rural California elementary school. They do next to no science or social science…they don’t learn history, geography. They do endless repetitions of math and reading material that they have already mastered. At this point, I wouldn’t care whether science/social science/history/geography was differentiated or not as long as they got SOMETHING.

As for reading and math, there are definite skill levels and I have only seen teachers able to differentiate them for two years in a total ten childyears in school. Both of those years occurred for my oldest child in two different years. In one year she was placed in a class with only twelve kids. In the other year, she was placed in a relatively homogenous classroom, in that she had three other children like her. The teacher could put the four of these kids together and let them work. It has been four years since then and my child has never been with these kids again. Once the school figured out what those kids could do, they were separated and isolated and never again given the chance to learn at their own pace.

How is there differentiated instruction in grad school….doesn’t everyone have to pass the same preliminary/qualifying exams at the end of the first year?

And, back to the homework thread…there is a rumor going around the mom circle from my kids elementary school. Because of budget cuts, homework won’t be assigned for the rest of the year because the school can’t afford paper. Everyone I have talked (I mean the grownups, not the kids) to thinks this is just fine because the homework is a hassle and has little value.

Graphic organizers are not the domain of SPED. My state tests the ability to construct a basic graphic organizer as a pre-writing skill. Because I’m not especially good at graphic organizers, I just use Jim Burke’s stuff. It’s better than anything I could come up with. I generally give his Tools for Thought as a present to my student teachers at the end of the year (along with all my lesson plans on a drive).

Rookie teachers should be given easier classes to teach and a lighter load the first year or two. Bet we’d keep more of them that way. Mentoring should be more collaborative, but the time isn’t usually given to the two teachers involved to do any of it.

Working “at a grade level,” is something of an artificial construction. We set reading levels by grade level–and this is certainly an area in which lots of differentiation is appropriate. However, not every content area is strictly hierarchical. For example, what does it mean to be “working at” a third vs a sixth grade level in social studies, or science? Frequently differentiation in non-hierarchical content areas is a matter of reading material appropriate to the reading level, writing assignments appropriate to the student’s ability to produce written work, provision of assignments accessible through students various learning strengths (aural, visual, kinesthetic, etc).

I am currently taking graduate level courses, and I woud submit that the “levels” of students in my classes, by many measures, are all over the place: whether judged by reading facility, ability to produce written work, prior experiences, all kinds of things. I would say that our work is highly differentiated–although, as graduate level adults a good bit of the onus rests on each of us. I have learned all kinds of learning tips and tricks from by fellow students who learn in different ways. The use of graphic organizers in planning, for instance is very helpful to many students (and yet, in school this is just a standard “special ed” device). Some students convert text to spoken work to be listened to rather than read. Some use dragon speech to get stuff into the computer due to a variety of input difficulties. I still stick to outlining to get stuff on paper. Some folks form study groups because they learn best by talking stuff out with others.

Doing these kinds of things in a classroom on an ongoing basis can be very helpful to students in realizing their own best ways of learning so that they can gradually assume greater levels of responsibility for their learning. I observed a high school class that had kinds take some kind of test to help identify areas of learning strength early in the year. As they went through the year, their various learning groups were constructed in various ways–sometimes with similar learners, sometimes in heterogeneous groups so that they could utilize each other’s strengths in projects (a skill that many employers report they have a great need for BTW).

As LS suggests, differentiation (as most of teaching) is not typically accomplished well by rookies, but relies on the development of lots of ways to accommodate and support. To me, this argues for more collaborative lesson planning between teachers, in order to give those newbies the advantage of experience (sort of differentiating the teaching experience, if you will).

In my regular sophomore class I have everything from very LD/ reading at an elementary level to kids who are reading at a college level (basically, MR to gifted in the same room). I’ve been doing it a number of years, so it isn’t fair to say I plan for each student — I have the same range every year, so my lessons are in place to accomodate it. However, it is very difficult work. I can’t imagine trying to manage it as a rookie.

How many different grade levels do you have in your classroom? For example, if you teach third grade, how many kids do you have working at a first grade, second grade,…..sixth grade etc? Is there a maximum number of grade levels you can teach effectively?