Differentiation Used To Enhance Learning

     For my study, I implemented differentiated math instruction into my daily math routine. Prior to beginning the study, students displayed a need for individualized instruction to further their level of learning. Our math period was changed from a whole group setting for an hour to four 15 minute stations. Beginning with a 15 minute introduction and hook to activate prior knowledge. The remainder of the block was spent in math with the teacher, games/technology, and independent work. Prior to each topic, students were given a pretest to determine with whom they would grow the most working alongside. Once the topic started, students were constantly assessed using different modes of formative assessment. The groups were fluid and changed, based on the varying needs of each student.

     Differentiating math through small groups provided students with the opportunity to deepen their understanding of math ideas. Research confirms that small group instruction does not hinder the curriculum being taught, but equips students with the tools and skills to master mathematical concepts (Barker & Harter, 2015, p.30). While collaborating with a kindergarten teacher in my district, she expressed how one of her favorite pieces of using this strategy in her classroom is the engagement that occurs for her students. Creating an environment where students have a desire to learn helps to accelerate learning. Throughout the process, students noted how much they enjoyed math during small group time. Many began approaching tough problems with an excitement for the challenge.

     Making sure that no students fall behind is important when monitoring your students progress and, as I was formatively assessing my students, I noted a need for not only reteaching, but enrichment. On many of my pretests, students were getting 100% prior to instruction. So the challenge became addressing the curriculum and finding ways to balance the varying levels of understanding. Daily observations led me to see students who were becoming less engaged due to their needs. In a whole group setting, it would have been difficult to successfully reach every child.

     During the study, students’ differing needs were met through differentiated instruction. Along with the curriculum, students were exposed to more strategies and methods to approach a skill. While completing the math mat at my table, we would use manipulatives and white boards to work out problems. This led to more collaborative learning and discussion during problem solving. If a misconception arose, that time would be used to break down problems and review their foundation of number sense. Independent work was another outlet that allowed students to be challenged and work through math at their pace. This work consisted of previously covered math ideas to review, as well as a few worksheets to push deeper.

​

Culturally Responsive Teaching  

     Creating a culture in my classroom where students knew they were cared for started with developing a trusting connection. I accomplished this goal in my room by knowing my students and acknowledging each is different and cherished. A formative assessment tool used in my district was “My Favorite No”. This tool is used when a teacher showcases an incorrect answer to help improve students misconceptions. This teaches students that it is okay to be wrong and that everyone learns differently. I used this tool throughout my study to check for understanding, and to put students in charge of improving their learning. Through my study, this was a core theme for differentiated instruction. By developing more individualized instruction, I was allowing each student to reach the same outcome through a different avenue, based on their needs.

     Having something be accessible means to give something the opportunity to be reached. Whole group instruction only gave a chunk of my students the solid chance to engage with the content being taught. The rest were confused or bored, which then caused them to disengage. But by differentiating instruction, students were able to “reach” the content in an appropriate way. The math curriculum was made available for each student, with none being left unreached. Groups varied in instruction methods as well as time allotted. There were times it was necessary to further instruction for a group and allow them more time to absorb the content. This gave each student the fair amount of teaching for their learning. The road may have look different for each student, but the same end goal was achieved.

    A best practice quality is seeking expertise and guidance. It is important to be a reflective scholar and know that the learning never stops and there is always advice to be heeded. Through the literature review process, I was shown the importance of gaining new perspectives. I began the development of teaching differentiated math with an idea of how it would run and work within my room. The help given to me through my previous mentors, and current ones, made me feel comfortable with enacting change. But an aspect of differentiated math that I attained understanding of through research were statistics and data that outlined the progress made through this implementation.

​

Collaboration

     Throughout my implementation of differentiated math I collaborated with many internal and external stakeholders. Identifying an area of need seems challenging because there are so many aspects of teaching that can be improved. After talking with my team, they gave input about what they had tried in the past and what they felt had been successful for kindergartners. They had more experience working with this age group, so it was reassuring to confide in them and receive insight based on their first-hand experience. My principal spoke to our school about focusing on improving our number sense and seeing a change throughout each grade. When I sat down and discussed my idea of differentiated math with her, she affirmed my decision by providing me with opportunities to observe teachers in our school who were already implementing it in their classroom.

     Externally, I had the opportunity to collaborate with various stakeholders. My CADRE associate encouraged me throughout the process, as well. She provided me with engagement activities that benefited and aided in my implementation of differentiated math. We also utilized co-teaching to help students be exposed to different teaching styles. This was a useful method because it allowed time for us to work with different students and address needs in smaller groups. We utilized coaching conversations  and reflection, weekly, to continually improve and tweak my implementation and professional practice. A handful of my CADRE peers were also working to improve their math methods and we were able to share our experiences. Although we teach different grades, there were ideas we shared with one another that aligned with the needs of our different students. During district meetings, we would meet as grade levels and it was helpful to collaborate with my fellow kindergarten teachers because they have more experience with our district adopted math curriculum. They shared management techniques with me, such as using a praise timer to provide students with feedback during group work time. I enjoyed this chance to show a student positive feedback, but also got the rest of my students back in check. I asked my students to use our math time to learn and grow from the people around them. I took this expectation and applied it to myself. I also gained many new insights from the people I worked alongside throughout this process.

​

Action Plan Calendar

​