Teachers today know that “one size fits all” is not true in the classroom, where students vary in readiness, interests, and learning profile (Laureate Education, 2009c). Further, because of differences in their brain networks, students will benefit from various methods of representation, expression, and engagement (Laureate Education, 2009a). With these differences in mind, teachers need to plan flexible lessons, offering options for content, process, product, affect, and learning environment to help all students effectively learn and demonstrate their learning (Laureate Education, 2009b).
As Tomlinson (Laureate Education, 2009d) notes, differentiated instruction (DI) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) require careful lesson planning. Many resources are available to assist teachers in implementing DI and UDL, but teachers do not have the time to explore every option. However, the differentiation station my colleagues and I created on Facebook lists examples of digital resources that we have summarized and evaluated. Thus, when we need a tool to facilitate learning for a group of students, we can turn to the differentiation station. The station, which is a public Facebook group at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=154189104598721&v=app_2373072738, has four categories: surveys and inventories, UDL information, DI tools and strategies, and additional resources. Among those suggested by my colleagues, one resource I expect to use soon is Toondoo, which helps students create cartoons and books; this tool can help differentiate by process or product. The Dare to Differentiate wiki will be a valuable resource for a wide variety of tools. A source that I recommended on the differentiation station, and which I have already used (see the example below), is http://edu.glogster.com/; this site lets teachers or students created interactive posters that can include multimedia elements to appeal to different learning profiles.
As a result of EDUC 6714, I plan to use more pre-assessment to customize instruction (Tomlinson, 2008), and technology, such as online student surveys, will help me do this. After creating two sample surveys as class projects, I will be able to quickly make new surveys to learn more about student readiness and interest before we begin new units.
Further, I am using online resources more to offer individualized options to my seventh graders, especially the interactive writing tools at the Read Write Think website, http://www.readwritethink.org/. These tools scaffold student writing for a variety of activities, including business letters, poems, and various types of essays. While some students do not need this help, it is valuable to others in meeting the writing objectives.
I also offered my students the option of creating a website as their assessment following the novel unit we just completed. Four students selected this option; one added additional features to his site, including a blog, and was delighted when many other seventh graders visited his blog to comment on the novel.
Students have never been completely alike, but today’s learners are more diverse than ever. To accommodate this variety and promote learning for all, technology can be a valuable tool; it provides options that would not be possible with traditional methods and engages learners accustomed to functioning in the digital age.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009a). Brain research and UDL. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009b). Introduction to differentiated instruction. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009c). Learner differences. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009d). Managing the differentiated classroom. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.
Tomlinson, C. (2008). Learning to love assessment. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 8–13. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Posts
