Article #7

Article #7

“The Impact of Differentiated Instruction in a Teacher Education Setting: Successes and Challenges”

By Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., Ramsook, L.

Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., Ramsook, L. (2013), authors of The Impact of Differentiated Instruction in a Teacher Education Setting: Successes and Challenges begin their research by discussing the “impact of using a differentiated instructional approach to teaching second year students pursuing an undergraduate course in curriculum studies at a tertiary institution” (pg. 28). Joseph et al. (2013), divides their research into nine sections. The first section is the introduction section. In this section, Joseph et al. (2013) imply that the latest research indicates that although graduates from teacher education programs typically understand the notion of differentiated instruction, new teachers usually have a hard time incorporating process, content, and product differentiation in their classrooms (pg. 28). After discussing the difficulties of incorporating differentiation techniques in the classroom, Joseph et al. (2013), explain the chief components of differentiated instruction. Joseph et al. (2013), believe that student readiness, student interest, student learning profile, content differentiation, process differentiation, product differentiation, modelling differentiation are all key traits to develop a differentiated classroom (pg. 30).

Once the authors explain the introduction Joseph et al. (2013) then move to section two and explain the purpose of the study (pg. 31). The objective of the research was to understand the relationship between student achievement in a sophomore year undergraduate curriculum studies class and the utilization of differentiated instruction during a sixteen week semester (pg. 31). Section two also includes the three research questions that are the foundation of their research. Research question one asks, "What are the successes and challenges associated with the implementation of differentiated instruction at the tertiary level?" Research question two asks, "What is the relationship between differentiated instruction and student achievement in curriculum studies over a period of one semester?" Research Question three asks, "What are prospective teachers’ perceptions about differentiated instruction and its potential impact on their classroom practice?" (pg. 31).

After discussing the purpose of the study Joseph et al. (2013), move to section three, which explains the course overview (pg. 31). Joseph et al. (2013), explain that the curriculum studies class in the study is a required general education course for every student trying to earn their bachelor of education degree. The objective of the class is to help students think about important questions surrounding education such as “what should be taught, and who decides what should be taught?” (pg. 31).

Implementing differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting is the fourth section Joseph et al. (2013) discusses (pg. 31).  Joseph et al. (2013) believe that although differentiated instruction is becoming more widespread in many K-12 schools internationally, there has not been much research conducted about teaching differentiation to undergraduate education students (pg. 31). Joseph et al. (2013) believe differentiation instruction could be considered a novel method to utilize in the college setting (pg. 31). Joseph et al. (2013), provide a table chart that offers an explanation of the different strategies researchers of this study implemented to showcase differentiated content (topic), process (activities), and product (assessment) in a teacher education environment (pg. 31).

Section five looks at the methodology of the study (pg. 32). The researchers used a varied research technique that included the utilization of classroom observations, questionnaires, student and teacher interviews, focus group discussions, students’ semester grades, and student reflections, to collect the relevant data from undergraduate students trying to earn their a bachelor of education degree. The entire population of the study consisted of four instructors along with 434 undergraduates from two teacher program campuses (pg. 32). In order to analyze the data, Joseph et al. (2013) arranged and organized the information to find patters and themes (pg. 33). Joseph et al. (2013) provide information about the students by using a table. The table illustrates that 81% of the students are female, 88% have 0-4 year of teaching experience, 43% are primary educators, 49% of students like to work in groups and 53% of students say they are visual learners.

After explaining the methodology section, Joseph et al. (2013) then move to section six, which includes the results and discussion (pg. 34). During this section, Joseph et al. (2013) include the experiences of the four instructors. For instance, teacher 1 named Stephen said the following about differentiated instruction, “after several years of teaching curriculum studies, the decision to differentiate instruction came as a breath of fresh air as it provided greater opportunities for me to meet the varying needs of learners in my class" (pg. 34). Teacher 2 named Marlene agreed with teacher 1 Stephen about differentiation when she said, "from an instructor’s point of view, the practice of differentiation is an excellent strategy” (pg. 34). However, Marlene did say that” the “process differentiation is very time consuming as it requires careful planning; and while differentiating product has many advantages for the learner, a considerable amount of time must also be spent constructing a rubric to assess students with diverse interests and learning preferences" (pg. 35).

Teacher 3 named Gerard said, "from my observation, differentiated instruction allowed for building relationships of sharing, trust and cooperation, which are vital in creating an effective learning community" (pg. 35). Teacher 4 named Leela felt like differentiated instruction was very useful because it “allows for critical and creative thinking. Students displayed their creativity through creative dramatic presentations, skits, and dance. The different modes of presentations included poems, songs, talk shows, drawings, charts and demonstrations which provided variation. These varied strategies readily appealed to different learning profiles and proved to be very effective" (pg. 36).

In addition, the researchers explained the success and challenges they came across during the time they were working with students using a differentiated classroom approach. One success of the differentiated classroom setting was an “increase student motivation in approaching academic tasks” (pg. 36). Another success of the differentiated environment was the” improved study habits and problem solving skills for students” (pg. 36). However, one challenge of the differentiated classroom was that it was often “a very time consuming exercise with long hours of planning, organizing and scheduling individuals and groups in a large class setting” (pg. 36). Another challenge to of the differentiated classroom approach was that it made it “difficult to cater to individual needs and preferences especially those individuals who prefer to work alone” (pg. 36).

Section seven looks at the relationship between differentiated instruction and student achievement (pg. 36). According to Joseph et al. (2013), grades collected from the class projects were utilized to understand the connection between measures of student successes in the curriculum studies class and use of differentiated instruction during a semester. Joseph et al. (2013) provide a number of tables that compare student’s grades over four assignments in the course. The tables comparing student’s grades illustrate that “students who were exposed to a differentiated instructional approach generally obtained higher grades than their counterparts who were taught in the traditional whole class instructional setting” (pg. 37).

After revealing the relationship between differentiated instruction and student achievement, chapter eight consists of students’ perceptions about differentiated instruction and its potential impact on their classroom practice (pg. 37). Students in the curriculum study course took a survey that asked them to discuss their views regarding differentiated instruction and its possible impression on their teaching instruction. For instance, survey statement said "I believe that all instructors should use differentiated instruction in their classrooms” (pg. 37). The data revealed that around 95% of students said they agreed with the statement whereas only 3% of students did not agree. Another survey item stated, "I plan to use differentiated instruction in my practicum classes sometime in the future"(pg. 37). Nearly every one of the survey participants at 99% said that they were interested in employing a differentiated instructional method in their upcoming practicum courses they will take at the university (pg. 37).

Section eight also includes a summary of the focus group findings and illustrates the awareness of the students’ understandings of differentiated instruction (pg. 38). One question the focus groups responded to was “based on your experience in the curriculum studies class, what do you see as the benefits of differentiated instruction?” (pg. 38). Students responded by saying “differentiated instruction was useful for me. It was effective. It afforded me the opportunity to work with people other than the regular ones that I work with. I felt confident because I chose the mode of evaluation” (pg. 38). Another question asked the focus groups to discuss “what the drawbacks are (if any) of differentiated instruction?” (pg. 38). Students responded by saying “the existing standardized assessment and other school practices and regulations may constrain effective use of differentiation” (pg. 38).

Joseph et al. (2013) close their paper with section nine, the conclusion (pg. 39). The conclusion discusses a detailed summary of the action research and article. The conclusion also provides an overview of the importance of using differentiated instruction. In addition, the conclusion highlights the successes and difficulties of differentiation based on 4 teachers and 434 education students’ perspectives. Joseph et al. (2013) end the article by saying, “if (differentiation) adopted more widely, a differentiated instructional approach has the potential to revolutionize teaching and learning” (pg. 39).

Reflection

Overall, I thought the researchers and authors did a great job. I believe the article was very well organized and the authors did a nice job at dividing the article into 9 sections. If the sections were not outlined or as clearly headed and numbered, I believe the reader would have had a difficult time following all of the information presented throughout the article. 

I also liked that this article considered college students opinions that were in teacher education programs. By looking at undergraduate teacher student perspectives, the researchers were able to look at inexperienced teachers understanding and viewpoint of differentiation in the classroom, which is not very common in the research I have found up to this point.

After reading the article by Joseph et al. (2013), I was very impressed with the number of research methods the researchers used to study this topic. For instance, the researchers used “questionnaires, focus group discussions, teacher and student interviews, classroom observations, students’ semester grades, and student reflections” (pg. 32). Although, all of the instruments used to conduct the research gave a lot of great information about differentiation, the immense amount of information was a bit overwhelming to keep track of during the results and discussion section.

I really liked that the authors included tables into their article. I believe the tables allow the readers to see and better understand the quantitative and qualitative data the researchers received. However, I felt like some of the tables were a little confusing to understand. For instance, I felt like the table comparing students grades was well organized, but it took a while to take in all of the quantitative information from all four classes. I believe a more in-depth summary and explanation of the table with the student’s grades would have benefited the article.

I also like that the study highlighted not only the strength of differentiated instruction, but also the weaknesses as well. I believe including both the successes and challenges helps the reader understand differentiation from two perspectives.  In addition, I like that the study acquired viewpoints from four experienced teachers and 434 undergraduate students getting ready to be teachers. This quality sample size is more representative of the population.

Reference

Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., Ramsook, L. (2013). The Impact of Differentiated Instruction in a Teacher Education Setting: Successes and Challenges. International Journal of Higher Education. 2(3) pg. 28-40. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1067355.pdf

Word Cloud created using key words from this article: