As a classroom teacher, we are constantly bombarded with the expectation to differentiate learning at every opportunity. Every lesson, every activity, every day should involve learning specifically tailored to each individual student and their individual abilities, interests, and learning goals. As Dr. Katie Novak presented in her dinner party analogy, the teacher is left feeling exhausted and, honestly, ineffective (2021). Through differentiated instruction, the teacher presents “options” for each student, but the student does not get any choice. They complete the option that the teacher feels is best for them. In this past school year’s T-TESS evaluation, I received maximum points for differentiation. However, did my students feel empowered and in control of their own learning? Probably not. And I am burnt out and exhausted because I am “a short-order cook”, serving up the perfect dish for each student, that they may or may not be interested in or engage with.
A more effective approach to differentiation is Universal Design for Learning, wherein educators still present a variety of options, but students can make the choices of what is best for them. Dr. Katie Novak compared UDL to creating a buffet of menu options instead, so that students can visit the buffet and select the options that best suit their learning needs (2021). This approach leads to learner agency, a sense of ownership, and responsibility in their learning.
Currently, in my classroom, I have been using a Differentiated Instruction approach, with elements of UDL included. For example, within the guideline of Design Multiple Means of Representation, I provide options for vocabulary, symbols, and language structure clarification through a multi-modal approach to vocabulary instruction. As a science teacher, we have a lot of vocabulary words, and students interact with the vocabulary daily in different ways, such as creating and adding to our word wall, vocabulary games, and interactive vocabulary lessons with visuals. I also design options for building knowledge by intentionally connecting new learning to prior knowledge. Science naturally focuses on exploring patterns, critical features, big ideas, and relationships among phenomena. This is an area of strength and something that I do both habitually and intentionally in my science classroom. An area that I could improve upon right away is to adjust my choice activities, such as choice boards, HyperDocs, and station work, to a “buffet” model rather than making student choices for them. I often number my activities so that they must progress in a particular order, or I will guide each student to the correct next step based on a common formative assessment. It would be a simple change to foster Multiple Means of Engagement by designing options for Welcoming Interests and Identities and providing students with the opportunity to make their own choices.
An area that I would like to improve upon, but will need some support, is providing choice in how material is learned and holding students accountable for their choices. If provided with too much choice, many students will choose the easy option or the one that requires the least amount of work from them. By intentionally designing Multiple Means of Action and Expression, utilizing multiple tools for construction, communication, and creativity, I think it is possible to hold students accountable for their learning. To research this further, I have consulted a few resources and colleagues for guidance. First of all, our campus GE instructor is a wonderful resource for classroom structures that maximize student choice and hold students accountable for participation. For those unfamiliar with GE, it is Great Expectations, a school philosophy that we use, which focuses on creating a positive, respectful, and academically rigorous learning environment. Many learning strategies and classroom structures within the GE framework are also aligned with UDL. UDL-aligned learning strategies, such as those found here, may also help by having various response activities that students can use to demonstrate their learning. Perhaps my need is in providing Multiple Means of Engagement, as students, especially those with disabilities, need to understand the WHY of learning. Students learn differently and have different preferences in the way that they are expected to learn. Engagement in learning is connected to the brain’s affective network, which processes emotion, motivation, and significance (Robinson, 2017). If students are not connected to WHY they are learning the material, they are less likely to engage with the learning and be able to make meaning of what they have learned. By looking at this from a parent’s perspective, it is obvious that this piece must be in place for the other pieces of representation, action, and expression to matter. If students are not engaged and do not understand the WHY, they will not find the ownership and agency that UDL requires to be successful.
UDL is a “framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn” (Robinson, 2017). It is not a one-size-fits-all approach, but rather it provides a buffet of choices to students in how they learn, interact with information, and demonstrate their learning. This school year, I vow to change my role from short-order cook to the builder of the buffet, providing options and choices for students to select themselves and take ownership of their own learning.
References
Blue, E. V., & Pace, D. (2011). UD and UDL: Paving the way toward inclusion and independence in the school library. Knowledge Quest, 39(3), 48-55.
[Novak Educational Consulting]. (2021, January 8). What is UDL? Universal Design for Learning explained (3 minutes) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYN-qrKIIYI
Robinson, D. E. (2017). Universal Design for Learning and school libraries: A logical partnership. Knowledge Quest, 46(1), 56-61.
Hello, I as well use the UDL framework specifically the Design Multiple Means of Representation. For my district they started interactive journals district wide for each grade level. The purpose of this is so that students are able to make sense of their own thinking through their own writing or illustrations. We do vocabulary work by writing the definition that is comprehensible and draw a picture giving the students opportunity to use different ways to understand the content. I agree with your point on working on giving choice to the students, and understanding how to hold students accountable on their learning. Which is a good thing to think about with other teachers and instructional coaches to collaborate to create a plan and implement it with support.
ReplyDeleteI really connected with your “short-order cook” analogy...differentiation can feel exactly like that! When students have real choices, they take more ownership of their learning. I especially like how you emphasized the “why” behind learning; when students understand that, their motivation shifts.
ReplyDeleteI really like the idea of the buffet analogy because it is so true. We are expected to meet every child's "dietary" needs, all while keeping up with the grade of an A standard. The difference is that at restaurants, there is a line of cooks, and in our classroom, it is just us. I really loved reading your post.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing the parent's perspective PDF. I agree with many of the points included, especially the concept that UDL is better and more equitable than other types of differentiation.
ReplyDeleteYou made some excellent points on how UDL is integrated into the classroom and library to ensure that all students are getting an equitable education and access to information resources. Thank you for sharing.
ReplyDelete