AdLIT In Perspective > 2007 > February
Classroom Vignette

Decidedly Doable Differentiation

by Lori Michalec, Tallmadge High School, Tallmadge, Ohio


Like most teachers, I look forward to the start of the school year with a mixture of anticipation and apprehension. The first weeks of August find me finalizing course syllabi and unit plans, purchasing new materials, and prepping my room. Primarily, this is because it is always most satisfying when I feel confident that I am fully prepared, if not overprepared, for the start of the year. But then my thoughts turn to my incoming students. Who are they? What are their individual needs? And how can I ensure that each is successful in my course?

While the "who" has never really troubled me, the "what" and the "how" give me pause. Thankfully, each year I find that apprehension dwindling. Armed with a handful of best practices in differentiating my curriculum, I have begun to build confidence. I know that I have practical strategies to apply that have been patiently tested in the various courses I teach, and this makes all the difference.

Admittedly, building my repertoire of best practices has taken time and patience, but the payoff has been huge. Starting with a few practical strategies gleaned at a district-wide in-service in my first year of teaching, I have grown my portfolio of differentiated lessons to a large stockpile― one that I am always happy to share with colleagues. These lessons take into account the various facets of differentiation: modification of content, process, and product. And over the years, I have begun to seamlessly incorporate these methodologies into my daily teaching.

Two Valuable Methodologies: Pretesting and Individualized Instruction

The practices that I rely most heavily on are pretesting and individualized instruction in grammar and writing, which includes individualized writing rubrics, assorted large- and small-group protocols for discussion, and paper and project choices.

Overall, I find that pretesting and individualized instruction have the greatest impact on student success. Consequently, within the first three days of school, students in my classes complete two pretests: vocabulary and grammar. Then, they complete an informal writing assessment geared toward personal reflection. This process not only allows me to identify students' strengths and weaknesses but empowers students as well. It takes the guesswork out of coming to class, eliminating a lot of the "What are we doing today?" questions. The pretesting allows students to see an "end" and promotes goal setting, which, in turn, promotes personal responsibility. For me, then, with the tabulated results in an Excel spreadsheet, I can update and review ongoing progress and ensure that students are meeting their potential; and ultimately, by allowing them to work at a level that is personally challenging, and at their own pace, the students experience a greater degree of success.

While, admittedly, the thought of individualizing vocabulary or grammar lessons initially overwhelmed me, I have found that tiered lessons are extremely doable. But most importantly, identifying struggling learners, grade-level learners, and accelerated learners allows me to plan instruction based on individual need. For example, students in my twelfth grade college prep (CP) English blocks are pretested over the vocabulary for the semester. Those who require remediation are then administered an eleventh grade CP vocabulary test. Based on their scores, they will begin their study in the eleventh grade curriculum and work toward grade-level mastery― often within weeks. For grade-level learners, they begin with the first unit of vocabulary instruction. Accelerated learners, however, complete a series of twelfth grade unit tests to indicate where instruction should start; then, based on scores, they may begin at a later unit in the vocabulary text or be provided supplemental words from ACT, SAT, or AP sources.

Likewise, pretesting in grammar has proved equally successful. The pretest covers the scope of material for mastery and allows me to discern who requires remediation, who needs ongoing guided grade-level instruction, and who is ready for more challenging practice and drills. Best of all, this instruction can be done in small groups or individually.

Then, building on individualized instruction, I provide individualized rubrics for essays. As a class, we discuss the most common "fatal errors" in writing. These include fragments, run-ons, lack of required punctuation, and lack of required capitalization. Accordingly, we work collectively to eliminate these errors in writing. Yet developing an individualized rubric seems key. So using the narrative written on the first day of class― which outlines experiences in prior English classes, expectations for the course, goals the students have set for themselves (both in the course and in school overall), and ways I may help them attain their goals― I identify strengths and weaknesses in syntactic fluency, unity, diction, and overall conventions and mechanics. Selecting one or two areas of immediate need allows me to assist students in setting realistic goals for initial improvement. A rubric, including the four fatal errors as components, is then generated based on individual need. As individual skills are mastered, additional areas for improvement are added to the rubric.

Activities That Support Peer Interaction

Yet an individual approach is not enough. Students continue to need, and desire, peer interaction. Therefore, my classes participate in a number of large- and small-group protocols, all of which are modeled within the first several weeks of class. Of those used, two large-group activities and two small-group activities seem to be continually successful.

Chalk Talk and Seed Card Discussion

Both the Chalk Talk and Seed Card Discussion activities actively engage and involve all students in participation. These protocols are often used as a means to incite creative and/or critical thinking about a subject and as a comprehensive review strategy, with each designed to prompt students to dialogue, albeit in very different formats.

The Chalk Talk is a silent discussion, wherein prompts are written on the board for review. After an initial "reflection period," students are free to walk to the board and begin a discussion thread or pose a question for clarification. In order to ensure that everyone participates, and that there is no noise or confusion due to foot traffic, "visits" to the board are limited― only four students at one time. This prevents students from jumping into "conversations" without appropriate forethought, providing ample time for them to read and reflect on comments and questions to formulate thoughtful responses and queries.

Conversely, a Seed Card Discussion is anything but quiet! This activity is designed as a traveling conversation. With desks arranged either in concentric circles, like a fishbowl, or in two rows of "facing" desks, students are paired to discuss provided prompts. In this activity, each student is given a card with a prompt, which I initially generate. (As time goes on and students become more comfortable with the protocol, they may generate their own prompts for future discussions.) To begin, students introduce themselves and exchange cards. Once this exchange has taken place, the pair is to discuss both of the prompts provided, in the allocated time. Then, when indicated, students in the designated "traveling row" move one seat to the right. Once the students are seated, the process repeats itself: Cards are exchanged, and dialogue ensues until the signal for "time" is given. These dialogue sessions are generally ninety seconds long but may be shortened or lengthened to suit the needs of students. For my students, ninety seconds allows for more one-on-one interactions. And because I generally spend a few minutes reviewing the protocol before beginning, I limit the discussion to one hour in our eighty-three-minute block; smaller classes may finish all prompts, whereas larger classes may not. Regardless, I reserve the end of the block for debriefing― at which time, students are provided a list of all prompts to review.

Similarly, when using either of the small-group protocols, I will often review the activity with students before beginning and allocate sufficient time for debriefing and/or an open Q&A session at the activity's conclusion. This fosters self-reflection and promotes active learning.

Text Rendering and Save the Last Word for Me

Of the small-group protocols, Text Rendering and Save the Last Word for Me prove most successful. Like their large-group counterparts, students participate in these nonthreatening activities that activate prior knowledge, provide opportunities for inference and evaluation, and lead to true learning across all levels of Bloom's taxonomy.

In Text Rendering, students are placed in groups of three or four, and a facilitator and scribe are assigned. Beginning with several minutes of quiet, every member of the group is directed by the facilitator to highlight a sentence, a phrase, and a single word that he or she finds significant in the text. Then, in round one, each member locates and reads his or her sentence and explains its meaning. The scribe records the sentences, but no discussion takes place. In round two, each member locates and reads his or her phrase and explains its meaning. Likewise, in round three, each word is located and read, and its meaning is explained. Finally, the group is allocated a period of time in which to discuss the various points raised and prepares to report to the entire class the insights that emerged from the group discussion.

In a similar fashion, students are grouped in threes for Save the Last Word for Me. Again, the facilitator directs members to observe two minutes of quiet so that every person has time to highlight a significant idea or quote from the text. Then, the first person in the group reads the portion of the text that he or she highlighted, locating it so that all members may follow along. In the minute provided, this person is only to read the passage, not comment on it. The other members of the group are then allocated a total of two minutes to respond to the quote, indicating why it is meaningful. Finally, the person who began has the "last word." He or she may acknowledge the ideas of others, explain how his or her thinking of the original quote has changed, or offer an interpretation that has not yet been raised. This process continues until all have had an opportunity to select a quote for discussion.

Papers and Projects

Discussions are not the only means by which to differentiate. Providing students with paper and project choices is another. Not only do these choices allow students to invest themselves in the undertaking, but they foster personal responsibility and self-esteem. For many, this is truly a chance to shine. So remember to offer students a number of prompts to choose from or a diverse list of projects to complete; or you can allow students to choose one medium over the other. It's up to you. Either way, be sure that the instructions and rubrics are detailed and clear and that the choices appeal to a wide range of multiple intelligences. In this way, the content, process, and product may be differentiated to meet individual needs.

A Few Good Strategies―a Great Start

So, as you can see, you only need to find a few strategies that really work. Then you can commit to growing your stockpile of strategies, keeping your teaching, and their learning, fresh and meaningful. But whatever approach you take to differentiating your curriculum, remember that it must be manageable for both you and your students. If either of you becomes frustrated or overwhelmed, take time out to reassess what is working and what isn't. Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day, and reaching and teaching all students won't happen overnight. So develop a plan to start with a handful of targeted strategies, perhaps introducing one every other week, and keep detailed anecdotal records for the first year or two. Before you know it, differentiating your curriculum will become second nature.


Now into her sixth year of teaching, Lori Michalec currently teaches 11 CP English, 12 CP English, and creative writing at Tallmadge High School. During her second year of teaching, as she completed her M.A. in English, she was nominated as Tallmadge High School Teacher of the Year. When she is not attending professional development workshops or graduate courses, Lori commits her time to advising the high school's Teen Institute (an anti-drug, -alcohol, and -nicotine organization), serving on various committees, traveling with her husband and three school-aged children, and serving as a Junior Girl Scout leader.

Return to top