Hall, Tracy; National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC); Differentiated Instruction: Effective Classroom Practices Report; June 2002;
Tracy Hall, senior research scientist for the National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC), focuses on differentiated instruction in this report on effective classroom practices. She begins by introducing and defining the practice. “Differentiated instruction is a teaching theory based on the premise that instructional approaches should vary and be adapted in relation to individual and diverse students in classrooms...To differentiate instruction is to recognize students varying background knowledge, readiness, language, preferences in language, interests, and to react responsively.” It acknowledges that to maximize student growth and learning opportunities, teaching practices must be tailored to meet the individual characteristics of students. Hall supplements her discussion of differentiated instruction by providing documented evidence of its effectiveness, highlighting its applications to general education classroom settings, and offering links to other sites for those interested in learning more. Hall also presents several key elements of differentiated instruction as identified by Tomlinson (2001); she discusses the content, the process, and the products of differentiated instruction as well several guidelines that make it more attainable as a teaching practice for educators.

Hall, Tracy, et al; National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC) Effective Classroom Practices; Differentiated Instruction and Implications for UDL Implementation;
Hall, Strangman, and Meyer discuss differentiated instruction and its implications for Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in this report on effective classroom practices for the NCAC. UDL is a strategy designed to increase “flexibility” in teaching and open up students’ access to materials and learning in the classroom. It is based on research in the neurosciences and effective teaching practices. The report introduces differentiated instruction, identifies its components and features, and provides a sampling of its many applications. The report also introduces UDL and describes its connection to differentiated instruction, including specific examples in which differentiated instruction is applied within the effective teaching practice framework of UDL. Numerous examples of the way in which differentiated instruction supplements the goals and practices of UDL are provided. “When combined with the practices and principles of UDL, differentiated instruction can provide teachers with both theory and practice to appropriately challenge the broad scope of students in classrooms today.” The authors recommend the following actions:

• Learn about Universal Design for Learning;
• Increase inventory and technology support;
• Implementation of UDL in curriculum planning and delivery;
• Secure administrative support; and
• Involve parents as advocates and volunteers.

Northwest Educational Technology Consortium (NWTC); Focus on Effectiveness; “Current Education Challenges: Differentiated Instruction”; 2005;
The Focus on Effectiveness web site, supported by the NWTC, builds on the work of Marzano et al, authors of Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. This site offers a range of resources including research about effective instructional practices with a focus on technology tools that support these practices.

Differentiated instruction, as defined by the NWTC, means meeting “the needs of individual learners, providing all students with the appropriate level of challenge and the appropriate supports to help them reach learning goals…Differentiation provides students with varied experiences to engage with content. A differentiated classroom offers multiple ways for students to access content, to process and make sense of the concepts and skills, and to develop products that demonstrate their learning.” The site offers a discussion of differentiated instruction including a summary of four key research findings and nine implementation steps. The findings are

• Intelligence is not a static quantity; it can grows through rich learning experiences;
• Students require moderate challenges to learn to the best of their ability;
• Students with special needs are not well-served by “homogenous grouping; and
• Anchoring activities help teachers to manage class time and provide strong students with productive, independent activities.

The nine implementation steps are

1. Differentiate standards-based instruction;
2. Encourage students to set their own learning goals;
3. Build on student’s pre-existing knowledge;
4. Utilize multiple learning styles;
5. Use grouping wisely;
6. Teach skills designed for learning success;
7. Provide opportunities for student choice in assignments and class work;
8. Use multiple assessment strategies that allow students to demonstrate what they have learned; and
9. Facilitate success and provide support in a student-centred classroom.

Classroom examples where technology tools are used to differentiate instruction are also provided. Each of the six examples included describe the strategy and supporting research as well as the technology tool(s) employed, McQuarrie, McRae, Stack-Cutler; “Differentiated

McQuarrie, McRae, Stack-Cutler; “Differentiated Instruction Provincial Research Review: Choice, Complexity and Creativity”; Research Findings from AISI Cycle 2 (2003-2006); Alberta Initiative for School Improvement; University of Alberta; 2008;
McQuarrie et al conducted this review of 25 successful Cycle 2 (2003-2006) Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) projects to examine the relationship between differentiated instruction, student success, and project supports. The authors derived their findings from annual AISI reports, as well as the outcomes of a focus group and telephone interviews with several AISI participants.

The authors reported the following six key findings regarding effective pedagogies and learning supports:

• Effective differentiation requires ongoing “assessment for learning” activities;
• Differentiated instruction boosts student self-confidence and engagement;
• Differentiated instruction encourages self-directedness and metacognition;
• Technology can greatly enhance the ability to differentiate instruction and engage students;
• Differentiated instruction furthers the goal to reach all learners; and
• Students with higher needs or “more at risk” receive greater support and benefits from differentiated instruction.

The authors also reported five key findings regarding effective project supports:

• Enhanced student learning begins with designed, high quality professional development of educators;
• Effective AISI project management supports the efforts of schools in creating differentiated learning opportunities (e.g., allocate time for professional dialogue provide common professional learning experiences, support beginning teachers, provide opportunities for modelling, mentoring and coaching, and develop a common understanding of differentiated instruction);
• Student learning is a collective responsibility that demands clear communication on the part of stakeholders;
• Expertise, leadership, commitment, and continuity, on the part of parties involved, greatly increases the likelihood of AISI project success; and
• Implementing effective differentiated instructional practices takes time.

The authors concluded that “meeting the needs of students from a diverse range of experiential, cultural and ability backgrounds requires collaboration among school professionals, students and families. Collaborative instructional and organizational models, differentiated curricular strategies and student-centred responsive teaching are recommended practices that translate into improved achievement for students. … Research findings of this report suggest that differentiated instruction clearly has the potential to create environments that maximize learning and the potential for success for ALL students, regardless of skill level or background.”

Sherman, Whitney; Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium; Virginia Commonwealth University School of Education; Differentiated Instruction: A Review of the Literature; Spring 2008; (Research Brief, Full Report)
This research brief, initiated by the Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium (MERC), provides a short review of the available literature on differentiated instruction, including that which discusses the theoretical background, rationale, and strategies of differentiated instruction, as well as the challenges it faces, and the conclusions that can be drawn about it from empirical studies. The authors describe differentiated instruction as “a two-step process that analyses the degree of challenge in teacher planning and modifies approaches to meet student’s abilities and interests.” It attempts to shift the focus from reshaping students to reshaping teacher practice making it about learning more than about teaching. Differentiated instruction is not “standardized instruction...simply giving students more work.” It is about altering and tailoring the delivery of curriculum to accommodate for individual capabilities and allow for more complex understanding and deeper interest. Differentiated instruction attempts to account for the diversity in student backgrounds, interests, and abilities. Thus, the relevance and control comes from ongoing formal and informal assessments measuring whether instruction aligns with students’ needs. The challenges facing differentiated instruction include:

• finding sufficient time;
• addressing classroom management;
• redefining teacher expectations;
• supporting educators’ professional development;
• balancing and maintaining various grouping structures;
• using appropriate and useful assessment practices;
• funding for resources; and
• communicating with parents.

The following quote emphasizes the authors’ findings about differentiated instruction. “The single most important aspect of differentiation is beginning instruction where students are.”

Subban, Pearl, Research Scholar Monash University Melbourne, Australia; A Research Basis Supporting Differentiated Instruction; February 2007;
This paper synthesizes the research from recent literature on differentiated instruction. In doing so, it clarifies and supports the practice of differentiated instruction as a model of teaching practice in modern education. More than simply a review, it is intended to defend the position that differentiated instruction is “an efficient and effective means of addressing the increasing diversity in Australian schools.” It appeals to three principles underlying the theoretical basis of this position.

1. The student-teacher relationship is a form of social interaction and collaborative partnership that encourages learning in a developmental and historical sense.
2. The social interaction between a learner and a knowledgeable adult creates a learning context that encourages intellectual activity, particularly the development of cognitive functions and communication skills.
3. The engagement and association of new learning with existing interest and learning increases the potential for effective learning. This impact is even more effective if learning occurs in a way that complements individual learning styles.

Building on these principles, the research brief points to several other factors in the literature that strengthen the case for differentiated instruction: student diversity; the dangers of teaching to the middle; the workings of the brain; individual learning styles; and multiple intelligences. In particular, it highlights research studies by Johnsen (2003), McAdamis (2001), Hodge (1997), and Tomlinson (1995 and 1998). The paper also suggests areas of research concerning differentiated instruction that require further study.

University of Alberta; “Literature Synopsis: Differentiated Instruction: A Research Brief for Practitioners”; 2004;
Designed primarily for educators, this brief offers a quick review of recent research concerning differentiated instruction, summarizes the key findings, and makes several suggestions for teachers. The key findings are:

• students have unique educational needs, which require unique instructional goals;
• the term “differentiation” better emphasizes the goal of tailoring learning environments, content, processes, and products to individual student needs;
• differentiation includes content, process, products, and learning environments;
• differentiation can utilize differences in texts, student support, expectations, student interests, curriculum tasks, and students’ abilities;
• instructional activities should be created based on needs, multiple intelligences, learning modalities, cognitive levels, student backgrounds, and personal interests;
• ideal differentiated classrooms are proactive, qualitative, student-centred, and utilize a mix of whole-class, group, and individual instructional activities;
• content and instructional modifications include multilevel instruction, the use of learning contracts, small-group instruction, language study, centres, projects, and different tasks for different ability groups;
• both traditional (Bloom’s Taxonomy) and new ways (brain-based research and constructivist theories) to differentiate instruction have proven promising;
• parents indicated that they believed differentiated instruction supports their children in attaining learning strategies, practical skills, and self-esteem; and
• administrators bear much responsibility for differentiation because they serve to impact curriculum, encourage teacher professional development, promote parent participation, and support teachers’ use of differentiated instruction in the classroom.

The brief also offers a number of helpful suggestions for getting to know the students, creating a positive environment, planning the optimal physical arrangement of the classroom, and allowing students to have choice in learning. Finally, the brief recommends a number of additional resources initially targeted for AISI coordinators and teachers.

Alberta Assessment Consortium; “Assessment in Action Fall Conference 2009”; Edmonton, Alberta; 2009;
This link connects readers to information about a future Assessment in Action conference. The fall 2009 conference will focus on strategies for assessment and/or differentiated instruction. Keynote speakers will include Rick Wormeli and Susan Sutton.

Alberta Education; “Elements of Effective Teaching Practice: Differentiated Instruction”; Knowledge and Employability Studio Teacher Workstation; Alberta; 2004;
This document by Alberta Education describes differentiated instruction as a key element of effective teaching practice. The authors state that differentiated instruction “maximizes learning by considering students’ individual and cultural learning styles, recognizing that some students will require adjusted expectations, and offering different ways for students to explore curriculum and demonstrate learning...With differentiated instruction, the teacher aims to create learning situations that match students’ current abilities and preferred learning styles while stretching their abilities and encouraging them to try new ways of learning.” Numerous sample strategies for differentiated instruction are offered in the first part of the document. These strategies are categorized as follows:

• Learning Environment – identifies strategies that can help to ensure the learning environment is supportive and comfortable for students (e.g., vary use of space, provide alternative seating options, consider various means of sound control, address quality of lighting).
• Learning Activities – identifies ways in which students can be provided with opportunities to actively explore concepts (e.g., adapt equipment or materials to meet students’ needs, vary the use of collaborative pairings or groupings, plan smooth transitions between activities, adjust the pace of activities).
• Presentation – identifies various modes and methods by which information and ideas can be presented to students (e.g., involve volunteers and students as presenters, use a variety of media to address various learning styles, provide instructions in multiple formats).
• Resources and Materials – identifies how resources and materials can be varied or adapted to support individual student needs (e.g., provide resources at multiple reading levels, use manipulatives, use adapted resources (e.g., enlarged print, sound recordings, digital learning resources), use computer-based tools and resources).
• Assignments and Assessments – identifies ways in which the type and complexity of the products that students create can be varied (e.g., vary student performance expectations, allow students to choose how they will demonstrate their knowledge based on their individual needs, interests, and abilities).

The second part of the document offers a instructional planning guide or checklist for differentiation.

Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA)
The ATA provides a lengthy bibliography of books and videos on differentiated instruction (see “Bibliographies”; 2007 )

They also offer a full- or half-day workshop on differentiated instruction. The workshop addresses the need for multi-level activities in classroom instruction, and recommends practical instructional strategies. “Participants explore such topics as creating learning environments that support differentiation, the role of the teacher in a differentiated classroom and planning differentiated lessons and assessments.” See “Differentiated Instruction: Workshop” for more information.

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)
The ASCD offers several lists of resources related to differentiated instruction as follows:

• See ASCD’s list of audio, mixed media, networks, online resources, print products and videos. For example, an ASCD online course on differentiated instruction is available at a cost of $99USD.
• Several upcoming ASCD workshops and conferences will be focusing on differentiated instructional strategies. See their complete list at http://www.ascd.org/conferences.aspx.

Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI)
Several AISI projects have been identified by school authorities as showing promise in the area of differentiated instruction. A quick search of the AISI promising practices clearinghouse using the keyword “differentiated” revealed eight such projects including: Literacy and Math Ability Grouping for Success and Meeting the Diverse Needs of ESL (Calgary Roman Catholic Separate School), Planning Sessions with a Template for Differentiation and Differentiation for High Able Students (K-3) (Calgary School District). For more information about these projects, search the AISI promising practices clearinghouse at http://education.alberta.ca/apps/aisi/prom/.

Corely, Mary Ann; National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy; “Differentiated Instruction: Adjusting to the Needs of All Learners;” Focus on the Basics – Connecting Research and Practice; Volume 7 Issue C March 2005;
Writing for the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy (NCSALL), Corely defines differentiated instruction, describes ways in which teachers can differentiate content, process, and product (the three elements of differentiated instruction as described in the work of Tomlinson), suggests strategies for differentiated curriculum delivery, and identifies the challenges facing differentiated instruction. “The cornerstone of differentiation is active planning: the teacher plans instruction strategically to meet the learners where they are and to offer multiple avenues through which they can access, understand, and apply learning.” This must take into account the interests, previous learning, and learning profiles of each student. The following issues are the primary challenges facing differentiated instruction:

• Time – differentiated instruction requires teachers to dedicate planning time to assessing learners’ needs, interests, and readiness levels; to determining key concepts and questions in the lessons; and to designing appropriate activities for each learner.
• Classroom management – differentiated instruction allows students to work at different paces and on different assignments, which places a greater responsibility on the teacher to facilitate curriculum delivery in such a way that students have appropriate and productive work constantly available. Teachers must become facilitators of learning, not dispensers.
• Professional development – teachers will have to learn and apply strategies that may be new to them. This requires effective professional development that prepares teachers for the changing roles and expectations required of them with differentiated instruction.

Corwin Press
Corwin Press has produced a bibliography of the resources it has published in the area of differentiated instructional strategies and brain-based teaching methods (see Corwin Press, Differentiated Instruction in the Brain-Friendly Classroom).

Curriculum Services Canada (CSC)
Curriculum Services Canada (CSC) is a not-for-profit Pan-Canadian standards agency that works closely with the Ontario Ministry of Education to provide services including development, implementation, evaluation, and accreditation of teaching and/or learning resources, and the delivery of web-based professional learning opportunities across Canada and internationally. Included among their resources are webcasts and articles related to differentiated instruction (What Differentiating Instruction Is, and What It Is Not (2004)).

Ontario Ministry of Education; The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat; Capacity Building Series; “ Differentiating Mathematics Instruction”; Secretariat Special Edition #7; September 2008;
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat published this document as part of its Capacity Building Series, a series intended to support leadership and instructional effectiveness in Ontario schools. The document offers a description of what differentiated instruction is, why it is important, how to implement it, and where to find further resources.

“All students need sufficient time and a variety of problem-solving contexts to use concepts, procedures and strategies and to develop and consolidate their understanding. When teachers are aware of their students’ prior knowledge and experiences, they can consider the different ways that students learn without pre-defining their capacity for learning.” This idea underlies the description of differentiated instruction in the document.

Teachers need to perform student assessments in order to recognize individual students’ interests, needs, and capacities, or what the document titles “zones of proximal development.” With the results of these assessments, teachers can tailor the delivery of curriculum to maximize the impact on each individual student.

The document focuses on the following themes regarding differentiated instruction:

• Valuing and recognizing the diversity of student thinking;
• Focusing instruction on key concepts more than just narrow learning goals;
• Planning instruction based on a trajectory/landscape that takes students’ development and sophistication on a topic into account;
• Designing open and parallel tasks that represent the teacher’s slight revision of the curriculum to meet the needs of students at different ranges; and
• Beginning implementation of differentiated instructional practices.

Though the document examines differentiated instruction using examples and discussions pertaining to mathematics, it has relevance across subject areas.

Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation
Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation has produced a similar but more extensive bibliography of resources (see Stewart Resources Centre, Adapting and Differentiating Curriculum and Instruction: A Bibliography of Resources, December 2007).

Spicer and Williams; Leading and Learning Conference; “The Why and How of Differentiated Instruction”; November 21-22, 2008;
This workshop was presented at the November 2008 Leading and Learning Conference in Red Deer. As the title suggests, the workshop presentation highlights the need to differentiate instruction to support diverse student populations. It offers an alternative presentation of relevant research and information about differentiated instruction. Several graphs, flowcharts, diagrams, and other visual representations help to describe the “why” and “how” of differentiating instruction through content, process and product according to students’ readiness, interests, learning profile and environment. Spicer and Williams also describe several practical “lo- and hi-prep” strategies and provide specific examples, templates and surveys (e.g., graphic organizers, exit cards, jigsaws, tiered activities, etc.).