Maple Bear - Responsive Differentiated Instruction Handbook

Maple Bear Global Schools
Responsive Differentiated Instruction

Best Practices Handbook
RESPONSIVE DIFFERENTIATED
INSTRUCTION
BEST PRACTICES

Handbook
1 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)


How Do Educational Experts Frame Differentiation?

Differentiation isn’t more work, it’s different work. – Shelley Moore

Students need to know that effort plus perseverance leads to success. This will foster a growth
mindset.
– Dweck, 2010; Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014

When kids are engaged at appropriate levels of challenge, the habits of persistence and curiosity
are developed. [They] are then willing to take intellectual risks. Continuously working with [them]
at their level of readiness is a general education strategy that can help prevent the need for
additional interventions. – Carol Ann Tomlinson

Differentiated instruction is a way “to shake things up” in the classroom, changing how students
learn and how teachers teach. – Thousand, Villa, & Nevin, 2014

Effective differentiation is built on a foundation of engaging, relevant, student-friendly targets that
clearly define expectations for learning. – EL Education, 2021a

Differentiated instruction is a way of thinking about teaching and learning. It is also a collection of
strategies that help [teachers] better address and manage the variety of learning needs in [the]
classroom. – Heacox & Strickland, 2012

The best differentiation is proactively planned. – Carol Ann Tomlinson

When we know our learners, we can make informed choices and adjust . . . teaching processes so
that all students have an optimal chance of succeeding. That is what it is about. – Gregory &
Kuzmich, 2014

Teachers are designers. An essential act of our profession is the design of curriculum and learning
experiences to meet specified purposes. – Wiggins & McTighe, 2005

Differentiation is a complex [endeavour] that requires a range of sophisticated [pedagogical] skills
that are developed over time and with practice. – Tennessee Department of Education, 2018

Differentiating instruction [DI] is rooted in “good teaching” tenets. It is about doing what is fair,
equal, and developmentally appropriate to promote growth for all students. DI involves a
compendium of best practices that teachers consistently and deliberately use to boost learning;
these tools can be employed to adapt anything that is “undifferentiated.” It requires us to do
different things for different students some, or a lot, of the time. It is whatever works to advance
students along the learning continuum.
– Rick Wormeli, 2018


There is not one single universally designed route for all learners. Treat diversity with flexibility.
– Understood for All, 2019

We need greater curricular focus on what matters most—powerful ideas with transfer.
– Wiggins & McTighe, 2005
Preface

“We believe that nothing is more important than the education of our children.”

Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd [MBGS]. is dedicated to promoting success for all children
through an inclusive school philosophy and program, that meet the requirements of the
mandated educational legislation in each region. Students are welcomed and equitably
supported within differentiated learning communities where they are encouraged to explore,
discover, contribute, and participate in all aspects of school life. The aim is for all students to feel
accepted, valued, and safe. As learners progress, Maple Bear teachers adapt instructional-
assessment approaches to build on student strengths and facilitate maximum academic and
emotional growth. Their teaching approaches are based on differentiation principles and are
highly effective in diverse educational environments. This handbook provides teachers with a
flexible road map for developing programs that are both challenging and responsive to
individual needs. The Responsive Differentiated Instruction: Best Practices document is designed
to help teachers create more opportunities for Maple Bear students to reach their full potential.

Table of Contents
Preface .......................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Tables................................................................................................................................. 6
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 6
Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7
Inclusion at Maple Bear Schools .......................................................................................................... 7
Maple Bear Core Values and Beliefs .................................................................................................... 7
Maple Bear Teaching Staff.................................................................................................................... 7
Section 2: Model for Addressing Diversity .................................................................................. 9
The Three-Tiered Pyramid Model....................................................................................................... 9
Features of the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model ........................................................................................................... 9
Application of the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model in Practice ................................................................................. 10
Section 3: Differentiation ........................................................................................................... 12
Introduction to Differentiation ......................................................................................................... 13
Philosophy of Differentiation ............................................................................................................ 13
Definition and Rationale .................................................................................................................... 13
Benefits of Differentiated Instruction............................................................................................... 14
Good Teachers ..................................................................................................................................... 14
Constructive Teacher Feedback ........................................................................................................ 14
Equal Access to the Curriculum ......................................................................................................... 14
The Differentiated Learning Continuum .......................................................................................... 15
Hallmarks of Supportive Differentiated Classrooms ...................................................................... 15
What Differentiated Instruction “Is” and “Is Not” ............................................................................ 15
(A) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Where to Begin? ....................................................... 17
(B) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: 4 Key Features .......................................................... 19
Content [The “what” of teaching] ............................................................................................................................. 19
Process [The “how” of teaching] .............................................................................................................................. 20
Product [The end result of learning]........................................................................................................................ 21
Learning Environment (Affect) [How students feel in class] ................................................................................. 22
(C) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Data Collection Measures ........................................ 23
Readiness ................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Readiness refers to students’ knowledge and skills in relation to a specific curricular objective; it is not the
same as intellectual capacity or ability. Readiness levels are affected by an individual’s background
knowledge, experiences, and previous exposure to the topic. Hence, these levels can seesaw markedly across
subject areas (Tomlinson, 2014). Readiness differentiation is at work when teachers present developmentally
appropriate educational activities that are “in advance” of children’s current stage of mastery (Zone of

Proximal Development-ZPD, Vygotsky, 1978); this means “raising the ceiling” for all students by supplying
legitimate levels of scaffolding and challenge. One tangible benefit is that they can directly connect their
persistent efforts to positive academic results (Byrdseed, 2009; Dweck, 2010; Utah State Board of Education
& Hanover Research, 2019). These tailored activities also help learners to bridge the gap between
dependence and independence. ............................................................................................................................... 24
Interests ..................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Learning Profiles ....................................................................................................................................................... 26
(D) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Backward Design Framework ................................ 27
Three Stages of Backward Design ............................................................................................................................ 29
(E) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) ..................... 31
UDL Principles & Guidelines ..................................................................................................................................... 31
Role of Technology .................................................................................................................................................... 32
(F) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Assessment................................................................ 36
Purposes of Differentiated Assessment ................................................................................................................... 36
Principles of Differentiated Assessment.................................................................................................................. 36
Teacher Responsibilities in Differentiated Assessment ......................................................................................... 38
Three Types of Assessment Techniques .................................................................................................................. 38
(G) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Lesson Development ................................................ 41
(H) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Strategy Selection .................................................... 43
Section 4: Glossary of Differentiated Concepts and Strategies ................................................ 46
Section 5: References ................................................................................................................. 61
Section 6: Appendices – Teacher Resources.............................................................................. 77
Appendix A: Planning Template I ...................................................................................................... 77
Appendix B: Planning Template II .................................................................................................... 78
Index ........................................................................................................................................... 80

List of Tables

Table 1. What Differentiated Instruction Is and Is Not
Table 2. Differentiated Activities Requiring Low-Prep and High-Prep
Table 3. The Three UDL Principles
Table 4. Student-Friendly UDL Learning Activities
Table 5. Differentiated Instruction Technology-Based Tools
Table 6. How to Plan for Differentiation
Table 7. Differentiating in Testing Situations
Table 8. Strategy Instruction Step-By-Step
Table 9. Differentiated Teaching Strategies

List of Figures

Figure 1. The Three-Tiered Pyramid Planning Model
Figure 2. Features of Differentiated Instruction
Figure 3: Bloom’s Taxonomy
Figure 4. Learner Characteristics Guide Differentiation
Figure 5. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development
Figure 6. Learning Preferences Continuum Assessment Chart
Figure 7. Stages of Backward Design
Figure 8. Lesson & Unit Planning Sequence: Stages 1 – 3
Figure 9. The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines
Figure 10. Characteristics of Effective Assessment
Figure 11. Differentiated Lesson Planning Summary: What Teachers Do
Figure 12. Backward Design Lesson Planning Template I
Figure 13. Backward Design Lesson Planning Template II


Section 1: Introduction

Inclusion at Maple Bear Schools

Maple Bear schools are inclusive communities, that are continuously evolving to address the
changing needs of students. Each school embraces inclusion as a means of enhancing the well-
being of every member of its population. Ongoing professional development and on-site,
collaborative efforts help Maple Bear school teams to bolster their capacity to provide the
foundation for a richer future for ALL.

At Maple Bear [MBGS], children with diverse learning and behavioural needs will experience
school in much the same way as their peers. In order to increase accessibility for every student,
MBGS educational professionals:
• Nurture school and classroom communities where all students, including those with
diverse needs and abilities, have a sense of personal belonging and achievement.
• Identify and foster practices by which students, with a wide range of learning needs, can
be taught together effectively.
• Enhance, through modelling and instruction, student abilities to cope with diversity.
• Offer students an environment that provides potential for dignified, meaningful
relationships.
• Provide all students with appropriate supports to develop their “personal best” within a
context that respects their abilities (MBGS Planning for Students with Special Needs).

Maple Bear Core Values and Beliefs
In most cases, Maple Bear programming consists of the regular curricular outcomes. However,
some students may also require individual or student-specific adaptations to fully access
classroom activities and achieve optimal levels of school success. All of our programs are
delivered in a positive educational setting, that include resources and services which are
responsive to the learning, social-emotional, and behavioural needs of all students. Maple Bear
emphasizes a preventative, proactive, and supportive process to develop the most effective
approaches to teaching and learning (MBGS Planning for Students with Special Needs).

Maple Bear Teaching Staff
Maple Bear teachers are committed to providing high-quality instruction to a broad range of
diverse students. To encourage optimal achievement and engagement, teachers:
(1) consider the scope of student abilities and learning styles;
(2) use flexible goals, methods, materials, and assessments to accommodate learner differences;
(3) focus on creating educational environments matched to students’ learning preferences,
abilities, and interests;
(4) create classroom conditions that encourage all students to take educational risks, stretch
their skills, and attain maximum school success; and

(5) embrace responsive, proactive strategies, informed by the principles of Universal Design for
Learning [UDL] and Differentiated Instruction [DI] (MBGS Planning for Students with Special
Needs).


Section 2: Model for Addressing Diversity

Maple Bear [MBGS] classrooms are diverse communities that include students with varied
interests, abilities, needs, learning styles, and cultural backgrounds. Implementation protocols
linked to accessibility, differentiated instruction [DI], inclusion, backward design, and Universal
Design for Learning [UDL] guide our efforts to create educational contexts where all students
can learn together and thrive (MBGS Planning for Students with Special Needs). MBGS teachers
consistently use an array of evidence-based learning continuums, strategies, and methodologies
to propel development, limit educational barriers, and increase success for all students.

The Three-Tiered Pyramid Model
The Three-Tiered Pyramid Model (Fox et al., 2003) also serves as a planning template to
facilitate student learning at Maple Bear schools. This three-level intervention tool provides a
continuum of scaffolds and services designed to support “typically developing” students and
those who may experience educational challenges along the way [Tier 1: “Universal” supports
for all students; Tier 2: “Targeted” supports for some students; and Tier 3: “Intensive” supports
for a few students].

The Three-Tiered Pyramid Model is:
• built on the premise that most learners will thrive if responsive, timely, universal
supports are readily available to ALL (Learn Alberta, 2010);
• focused on proactively addressing academic and behaviour challenges before learning
and success are derailed;
• highly effective when the key tenets of the approach are enacted with rigour and fidelity;
• linked to data-driven approaches (UDL, DI, ZPD, Backward Design); and
• centred around structures that embrace a collaborative, team-based orientation to
support service delivery (MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for
Schools).

Features of the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model
This powerful framework: (1) represents a continuum that can be used in many contexts
(school-wide, classroom, individual); (2) involves a systematic process; (3) applies to multiple,
evidence-based learning, socio-emotional, and behavioural strategies and interventions, to
support varying ages and developmental levels; (4) includes assessment “for, of, as” learning, as
well as individual and classroom profiles; (5) emphasizes strengths, needs, priorities, and
proactive planning for all students; (6) can be strategically used; (7) provides access to
programming aimed at academic, behavioural, and socio-emotional development; (8) begins
with universal curricular entry points and gradually introduces appropriate degrees of
complexity, based on student needs; and (9) adheres to the principles of “good teaching” (MBGS
Planning for Students with Special Needs).



Application of the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model in Practice
The Three-Tiered Pyramid Model is designed to identify strengths, needs, and priorities; it
offers a continuum of proactive, responsive strategies applicable to all students. This framework
can be readily adapted to changes in academic learning, behaviour, and social-emotional
development (universal, targeted, intensive). Thus, a range of needs can be successfully
addressed by fine-tuning the complexity and intensity of supports. A student’s placement in a
tier is fluid; fluctuations are expected because competency and skill vary across subject areas
(over time).

Figure 1. The Three-Tiered Pyramid Planning Model

Tier 3 [Intensive Individual Instruction]
• Intensive Intervention
• 5-10% of students [FEW]
• IEPs (modifications)
• Intensive, systematic, daily intervention over a long period of time
• Students who are not progressing are referred for additional assessment

Tier 2 [Targeted Group Intervention]
• Supplementary, Targeted Intervention
• Students with demonstrated gaps in learning
• Adaptations of regular education curriculum
• 15-20% of students [SOME]
• Targeted, systematic, 3-5 times/week for a term or portion of the year
• Students who are not progressing move to “temporary” Tier 3 interventions
Tier 1 [Universal Programming, School-Wide Supports]

• Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
• Differentiated Instruction (DI)
• Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
• Proactive planning with common entry points for ALL
• Regular education programs, including strategic scaffolding
• Implementation of research-based, best practices
• Use of learning continuums
• Emphasis on frequent, formative assessment & valid feedback for students & parents
• Students who are not progressing move to “temporary” Tier 2 intervention

Sources: Adapted from Edmonton Public Schools. 2013; MBGS Planning for Students with Special Needs; Ontario
Ministry of Education, 2011

Section 3: Differentiation
Figure 2. Features of Differentiated Instruction

MBGS teachers see DI as a proactive, growth-oriented approach that includes:

backward design; flexible groupings & choice; UDL; responsive programs tied to student variances;
respectful/ purposeful tasks; the 3-tiered pyramid model; a safe, supportive learning climate; equitable
access to curriculum; adaptable management structures & routines; and ongoing assessment driving
instruction.

Teachers differentiate

Content Process Product Learning Environment
The information & ideas How students How students show How students “feel” in the
students wrestle with to internalize & process what they can do, classroom
reach learning goals content material know & understand

based on students’ individual

Readiness Interests Learning Profiles
specific student learning goals inclinations, passions, & preferred learning modes
affinities

through a range of instructional & management strategies including:

• multiple intelligences • small group instruction • mix of questioning techniques
• jigsaws • tiered lessons • curriculum compacting
• recorded materials • stations & products • scaffolded teaching
• anchor activities • independent studies • different levels of complexity
• graphic organizers • learning contracts • varied interest centres,
• varied texts/support material • orbitals homework tasks & groupings
• literature circles • group investigations • journaling prompts


Sources: Adapted from EL Education, 2021a; Newfoundland & Labrador Department of Education, n.d.; Ontario
Ministry of Education, 2013; Tomlinson & Moon, 2013

Introduction to Differentiation
The chief job of schools is to increase the capacity of all individuals (Tomlinson, 2000). Helping
students to become self-directed learners, independent thinkers, and productive problem-
solvers is central to the process (Costa & Kallick, 2000, cited in Chapman & King, 2009).
Differentiated instruction allows teachers to proactively consider each aspect of the child,
including the unique intelligences, learning styles, and emotional predispositions (Chapman &
King, 2009). To be effective, educators must establish a careful balance between academic
content and student needs (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). The ultimate goal of differentiation is
to underscore differences and strengths, not mask them. This information is vital for designing
effective, flexible curricular content, learning activities, and formative-summative assessments
(The Iris Center, 2012; Tomlinson, 2017).

Philosophy of Differentiation
Differentiated instruction [DI] is one of the ways with which educators establish supportive
learning conditions that promote success for all students (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996).
It is a research-based, flexible model of classroom practice intended to assist practitioners in
developing meaningful curriculum and instructional approaches that maximize the capacity of
diverse groups of learners (Tomlinson & Moon, 2013). Simply put, DI is both a “frame of mind”
and a philosophy founded on the premise that teachers must adapt instruction to match
students’ intrinsic differences. Why? Because a rigid, “one-size-fits-all” orientation is likely to
fail (Tomlinson, 2015). Supporters of differentiation believe that: (1) students’ brains are as
distinctive as their fingerprints; (2) teacher and student attitudes matter, (3) continuous,
informal assessment is necessary, and (4) opportunities for learning are always present (Dweck,
2010; Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014).

Definition and Rationale
Differentiated Instruction [DI] is recognized as a compilation of many, evidence-based theories
and practices that is fully embraced at Maple Bear schools (i.e., UDL, Inclusion, ZPD, etc.). This
teaching approach involves a series of instructional (and assessment) techniques that are
designed to be systematically applied, so that all children can participate in engaging classrooms
and feel part of the learning community (Hall et al., 2004). When these kinds of curricular
recalibrations are in place, educators are able to more intentionally respond to learning
proclivities, readiness, cultures, interests, and strengths and, in so doing, positively contribute to
student success (Manitoba Education & Advanced Learning, 2015; MBGS Planning for Students
with Special Needs). At its most rudimentary level, differentiation is all about the efforts of
teachers to address individual differences and to successfully educate as many students as
possible (Lombardi, 2019; Tomlinson, 2000).


Benefits of Differentiated Instruction

• Research shows that differentiated instruction is effective for high-ability students and
for those with mild to severe disabilities.
• When students have several options for processing content material, they take on more
responsibility for their own learning.
• Differentiated classrooms increase opportunities for students to actively engage in
learning; fewer unproductive behaviours surface in such environments.
• Using the reading, writing, and math continuums and grouping students for ‘just right’
instruction-assessment are effective ways to differentiate practice (MBGS Understanding
& Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools).

Good Teachers
Good teachers understand that they have content and skills to cover, students who need to learn
those skills, and noticeable variances among the members of the classroom community. This, in
essence, is differentiation (Doubet & Hockett, 2017). At Maple Bear schools, we accept that all
educators differentiate to some extent. It is in the nature of teaching to recognize individual
learning behaviours and to shape instruction and classroom organization accordingly (MBGS
Planning for Students with Special Needs). In their role as adept, professional “designers,”
teachers are able to effectively respond to any group of multi-dimensional learners.
Nevertheless, experts admit that there is no “silver bullet” when it comes to making sound
differentiated-based decisions (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2020). In the early implementation phases,
the general consensus is to start small (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014; Heacox & Strickland, 2012).

Constructive Teacher Feedback
Constructive (descriptive) feedback is one of the important features of a rich differentiated
class. At Maple Bear schools, educators are encouraged to consistently respond to children in
ways that are fair, predictable, clear, respectful, and helpful (MBGS Understanding & Guiding
Behaviour: A Resource for Schools). When students receive affirmative “messages of possibility”
from teachers, they tend to be more optimistic, persistent, and confident in their learning
abilities (i.e., growth mindset). Without meaningful, frequent reassurance, students may see
themselves as incapable and simply withdraw (i.e., fixed mindset) (Dweck, 2010). Thus, high-
calibre feedback is a key ingredient on the path to school success (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014;
Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015).

Equal Access to the Curriculum
Differentiated programming is inherently flexible, rigorous, varied, relevant, and complex
(Heacox & Strickland, 2012). It forms a seamless part of everyday planning and classroom
practice. Student access to curricular content, in a manner best-suited to performance levels,
learning styles, and interests is prioritized; individual needs are “honoured” and learning
capacity is accelerated (The Iris Center, 2021; Tomlinson & Strickland, 2005).


To maximize accessibility, accommodate differences, and cultivate success, teachers must

nimbly weave a combination of instructional strategies, curricular lessons, and performance-
based assessments into their daily classroom activities (Huebner, 2010, cited in Utah State
Board of Education & Hanover Research, 2019).

The Differentiated Learning Continuum
It is anticipated that teachers begin “where the students are” (i.e., what they know & what they
need to know). For learners to thrive, instructional and assessment practices must be
thoughtfully introduced; these practices must “capitalize” on individual interests and strengths,
in order to fuel significant growth (Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Tomlinson, 1999). In
differentiated classrooms, multiple openings for exploring, sense-making, and demonstrating
understanding are available to students as they advance through the various stages of the
designated learning continuum.

Hallmarks of Supportive Differentiated Classrooms
At Maple Bear schools, education practitioners create welcoming, inclusive school communities
that are designed to meet students’ academic and social needs. In these settings, it is expected
that everyone will make gains across an array of skill areas (MBGS Planning for Students with
Special Needs). Educators play a crucial role in building robust schools that function optimally
and challenge all learners. In differentiated classrooms, teachers: (1) acknowledge students’
idiosyncratic differences, interests, strengths, creativity, and learning inclinations; (2) use
flexible student groupings to complete classroom tasks; (3) realize the role of motivation, effort,
confidence, and belonging in the educational process; (4) encourage independence and personal
responsibility for learning; and (5) construct activities that provide several avenues to success
(Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Wormeli, 2018). All of these elements are interrelated and
symbiotic (Tomlinson, & Moon, 2013).

What Differentiated Instruction “Is” and “Is Not”
Differentiated instruction is a dynamic, student-centred, inclusive teaching approach; it is
underpinned by the belief that everybody is able to learn (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996).
Student learning can be dramatically influenced when DI is well executed (Hall et al., 2004). But
this involves more than a few decision-making procedures and instructional activities
(Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015). Rather, “the . . . more elegant truth is that effective teaching is a
system composed of interdependent elements. [Like] all systems, each part is enhanced when
others are [fortified] and each part is diminished when any part is weakened” (Tomlinson &
Moon, 2013, p. 1).


Table 1. What Differentiated Instruction Is and Is Not

DI is . . .
- a philosophy or set of beliefs for diversifying teaching and learning
- proactive, dynamic, and “organic”
- fine-tuned to all students’ readiness, interests, learning styles, and prior experiences
- aligned with the principles of inclusion, backward design, and UDL
- about creating “ideal” learning conditions for all individuals
- responsive to all students’ need for support or challenge
- more qualitative than quantitative
- a collaborative endeavour
- driven by ongoing assessment and high expectations
- about adjusting content, process, work products, and learning environments to promote
growth
- student-centred
- designed to include multiple pathways to success (strategic scaffolding & structured choices)
- about using a rich repertoire of individual, small group, and whole-class instructional
strategies
- most effective when it is engaging, relevant, and interesting
- rooted in good teaching
DI is not . . .
- about “dumbing down” the curriculum
- individualized instruction
- an isolated component of the teaching process
- about placing struggling students in separate “pull-out” programs
- a classroom “add-on”
- standardized instruction geared towards the “allegedly average” learner (“teach to the
middle”)
- a sequence of fragmented educational activities
- about affixing labels to students
- a pre-determined “recipe” for teaching and learning
- about organizing students into fixed, ability groupings
- a reactive response to learner difficulty
- about “all students doing the same thing, in the same way, at the same time”
- a “one-size-fits-all” methodology
- what teachers do when they have extra time
- designed only for particular grades, subjects, or students (special needs)

Sources: Adapted from Edugains, 2016b; Lombardi, 2019; Thousand et al., 2014; Tomlinson, 2000, 2014, 2017


(A) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Where to Begin?

An important underlying belief is that children can learn, given suitable classroom conditions.
But there is no “silver bullet” when it comes to transforming schools into inclusive,
differentiated hubs. The conventional wisdom is to seek out the support of like-minded
colleagues and “start small.” It is also wise to analyze existing practices and select an area of
accessibility that is of concern (Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Tomlinson, 2000a, 2004). Newly
designed approaches often target one of the four key DI features: content, process, product, or
learning environment. Nonetheless, any instructional choices should be balanced, coherent,
deliberate, challenging, and tightly blended with students’ readiness (needs, prior knowledge),
interests (choices, background), or learning profiles (styles, multiple intelligences) (Heacox &
Strickland, 2012). In a nutshell, this process involves a cycle of continuous assessment, planning,
instructing, reflecting, and adjusting; the aim is to promote maximum growth and success.
Fortunately, there is a plethora of responsive, “low- and high-prep” activities, materials, and
exercises with which to experiment; teachers are urged to take calculated pedagogical “risks,” to
establish the best fit for individual learners.


Table 2. Differentiated Activities Requiring Low-Prep and High-Prep

DI Activities Requiring Minimal Prep DI Activities Requiring more Prep

- Activity options [design-a-day, let’s make a deal] - Assessment options
- Assistive technology - Centres/stations [readiness, interest, profile]
- Book choices - Choice boards
- Computer buddies - Community mentorships
- Cooperative team-building tasks - Curriculum compacting
- Demonstration of knowledge options - Cubing
- Digital curriculum [if MBGS approved] - End-of-chapter pretest
- Exit cards - Entry points (universal)
- Explorations [based on interests] - Flipped classroom
- Games to practise [mastery] - Graduated rubrics
- Goal setting [student-teacher] - Graphic organizers
- Graffiti wall - Group investigations
- Homework options - Hands-on activities
- Jigsaws - Independent studies
- Journal-prompt variations - Interest groups
- Levelled questions [Bloom’s Taxonomy] - Interview students
- Manipulatives - Learning contracts
- Mentors [computer, math, etc.] - Literature circles
- Mini lessons [re-teach/extend skills] - Low-floor high-ceiling tasks (math)
- Modes of “expression” variations - Menus
- Negotiated criteria - Multiple-intelligence options
- One-to-one chats - Oral tests/exams
- Open-ended activities - Personal agendas
- Orbitals - Problem-based learning
- Pacing variations [with anchor options] - Reading format options
- RAFTs - Recorded materials
- Reading buddies - Simulations (“simulated authenticity”)
- Scaffolding variations - Study guides/handouts
- Seating flexibility - Surveys
- Software/learning app options - Student-centered [design a project]
- Student-teacher activity negotiations - Task cards
- Supplementary material options - Text options [choice]
- Think-pair-share - Tic-Tac-Toe
- Timeline variations - Tiered complexity [tasks, centres, labs, products]
- Whole-to-part explanations - Tournaments
- Work in partners, small groups (pods), alone - Web inquiries

Sources: Adapted from Alberta Education, 2010; Chapman & King, 2005; Edugains, 2016b; Enome, Inc., 2021;
Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Learn Alberta, 2013; MB Effective Differentiation PowerPoint: Patti Rodger, 2021;
McTighe & Wiggins, 2011; NL Department of Education. n.d.; The Iris Center, 2013; Tomlinson, 2000, 2004, 2014


(B) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: 4 Key Features

Effective differentiated approaches call for the flexible delivery of tailored instruction, to optimize
individuals’ knowledge acquisition and skill development. Experts agree that translating DI
principles into diverse classrooms cannot be accomplished without assessment data and careful,
proactive planning; this planning is predicated on students’ readiness, interests, and learning
profiles (Manitoba Education & Training, 2015; Thousand et al., 2014; Tomlinson, 2014;
Tomlinson & Strickland, 2005). Four key features inform the differentiated decision-making
process: (1) content, (2) process, (3) products, and (4) learning environment. Differentiating
instruction involves the deliberate manipulation of one or more of these features. Teachers
must continually assess; reflect; and adjust content, process, product, or learning environment
to meet student needs.

Content [The “what” of teaching]
Content refers to the curricular concepts, principles, and skills that students must consolidate.
In DI classes, everyone explores the same “big ideas” (core program goals). Appropriate
scaffolding and presentation modes, (tied to needs), accompany this teaching approach
(Tomlinson, 1999). Maple Bear schools have a prescriptive and well-researched curriculum
extending from early childhood to high school. However, students’ competencies deviate greatly
(MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools). It is recommended that
teachers avoid “watering down” subject matter. Rather, attention should be placed on
instructional methods and materials that enhance students’ access to “essential” information
(Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010).

Figure 3. Bloom’s Taxonomy

Sources: Adapted from Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Armstrong, 2010, Ontario Ministry of Education, Literacy &
Numeracy Secretariat, 2011


Examples of Differentiating Content:

• Ask students to match vocabulary words to definitions
• Introduce content activities that are compatible with students’ prior knowledge and
needs
• Dive into the Bloom’s Taxonomy toolkit to design differentiated tasks
• Use audio-recordings of learning materials
• Assign a reading passage with questions for students to answer
• Organize reading buddy pairs
• Prepare readiness-appropriate vocabulary and spelling lists
• Adapt instruction of curricular topics for struggling to advanced students
• Present abstract concepts and ideas through visual-auditory means
• Encourage students to create a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the lesson
• Introduce concept-focused, “considerate” texts with different readability levels
• Have learners identify the author’s position and provide evidence to support this
viewpoint
• Provide text-to-speech software to ease access to print-based activities
• Tell students to create an alternate ending for a story (or add a new character)
• Ensure that learning tasks correspond directly with curricular outcomes, standards, and
goals
• Ask students to differentiate fact from opinion in a story or expository-text selection
• Accentuate the same “essential” concepts, principles, and skills for ALL (adjust
complexity) (Hall et al., 2004; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; MBGS Understanding & Guiding
Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson, 1999, 2000a).

Process [The “how” of teaching]
Process refers to a range of engaging, skill-building activities that teachers incorporate into their
lessons (Tomlinson, 1999). The process-related activities contain layers of support and
difficulty that are adjusted in response to student challenges, interests, and preferences. Maple
Bear teachers understand that they can enrich student learning by offering support based on
individual needs (MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools). When DI
processes are deployed strategically, learners are able to more easily understand and assimilate
the ideas under study. The ultimate goal is for students to: (1) be fully engaged, (2) take
calculated academic risks, and (3) gain greater autonomy as self-directed learners (Tomlinson &
Imbeau, 2010; Tomlinson & Moon, 2013).

Examples of Differentiating Process:
• Supply textbooks for visual and word learners
• Give auditory learners opportunities to utilize audiobooks
• Provide kinesthetic learners with access to interactive tasks online (models, dioramas,
etc.)
• Teach new concepts using tiered activities
• Develop interest centres to facilitate exploration of subsets within class topics
• Generate personal agendas (task lists) with flexible deadlines
• Leverage technology to overcome print-related barriers

• Provide manipulatives and other scaffolds, based on student needs

• Adjust assignment depth and timelines to accommodate struggling and advanced
learners
• Organize dynamic student groupings, including whole-class introductory lessons (“big
ideas”), small-group configurations, and paired work
• Design classroom management strategies, including organizational and instructional-
delivery procedures, that are based on differentiation principles
• Introduce a mixture of tasks, materials and equipment, aimed at honing students’
divergent levels of critical-creative thinking skills
• Present the “low-floor high-ceiling” strategy (Jo Boaler) to promote access and advanced
skill development [Math] (Hall et al., 2004; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; MBGS
Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson, 1999, 2000a).

Product [The end result of learning]
Product refers to projects that are completed at the end of a unit. In differentiated contexts,
teachers develop culminating assignments based on three characteristics: readiness, interests,
and learning profiles (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). Thus, opportunities are provided for
students to show mastery of the same conceptual material (in various ways). Final products also
evaluate whether individuals can “apply and extend” new knowledge in unpredictable
situations, beyond the schoolhouse doors (MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource
for Schools; Tomlinson, 1999).

Examples of Differentiating Products:
• Allow students to produce a range of tangible, hands-on products such as: puppet shows,
dances, letters, murals, brochures, models, dialogues, speeches, skits, debates, or mock
trials
• Employ rubrics that help students to stretch their skill development and show
competency
• Permit the class to work independently or in small groups
• Give learners a chance to submit original works that express their knowledge and skills
• Offer choices, scaffolds, and “menus of projects,” adapted to diverse needs and interests
• Provide strategic access for students to do interviews, surveys, and performance
evaluations
• Ensure that learning tasks are interesting, engaging, and accessible; they should be
geared towards improving students’ “essential” skills and understandings
• Design assignments with flexible procedures, evaluation tools, degrees of complexity,
and means of expression
• Encourage students to demonstrate conceptual mastery, based on learning styles
• Give varied opportunities for students to read and write reports on preferred books
• Invite visual learners to create graphic organizers to depict elements of self-selected
texts
• Urge auditory learners to complete oral accounts of favourite stories

• Provide openings for kinesthetic learners to construct dioramas that illustrate “special”
books (Hall et al., 2004; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; MBGS Understanding & Guiding
Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson, 1999, 2000a).

Learning Environment (Affect) [How students feel in class]
The learning environment refers to the routines, physical organization, and “climate” of the
educational space. Supportive, stimulating spaces reflect a belief that a student’s IQ is not a
static entity (Hattie, 2012). Given the brain’s innate “plasticity,” intelligence can “ebb and flow”
depending on the quality of the learning context; if conditions are ideal, the flame of curiosity
will be ignited, not attenuated. Strong teacher-student relationships are also central to a positive
learning experience (Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015). Without the security of “trusting” classrooms,
attuned to student idiosyncrasies, differentiating content, process, and product is more difficult
to accomplish; the desired academic outcomes may be stalled (The Iris Center, 2021; Tomlinson,
2003; Tomlinson, & Moon, 2013). To “reach and teach” everyone and build success, Maple Bear
teachers must create productive, structured, pliable, “invitational” learning settings (Hattie,
2012; MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson & Moon,
2013). Different types of furniture and classroom arrangements can also be incorporated to
facilitate individual and small-group work (MB Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource
for Schools). For “real” learning to occur, the “feel” and functioning of the classroom count
(Manitoba Education & Training, 2015).

Examples of Differentiating the Learning Environment:
• Place some students into assigned groups to discuss common tasks
• Allow independent learners to work alone (if preferred)
• Create quiet zones in the classroom that are comfortable and distraction-free
• Incorporate a balance of teacher-assigned and student-selected activities
• Create collaborative areas in the room where students can work together quietly
• Develop tasks that are challenging, stimulating, and valuable
• Communicate clear guidelines for independent work (matched to needs)
• Offer culturally sensitive materials
• Generate motivating lessons that include student choice (lecture, discussion, practice)
• Provide materials that reflect a variety of home settings
• Design structured, predictable, student routines for solving problems, seeking help,
managing learning materials, and moving around the class, etc.
• Establish classroom conditions that set a respectful, non-judgemental tone
• Ensure that high expectations for learning are maintained
• Operationalize ongoing assessment protocols to drive instructional decision-making
(Hall et al., 2004; MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; The
Iris Center, 2021; Tomlinson, 1995, 1999, 2000a).
It is important for teachers to observe and communicate with students as they undertake the
activities outlined above. “Successive approximations” of the targeted behaviours can be
reinforced or rectified immediately. To push learning even further, Maple Bear educators must
“tweak” their approaches to achieve closer alignment with students’ distinctive readiness,
interest, and learning profile characteristics.


(C) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Data Collection Measures
Differentiation is a cyclical process [assess, reflect, adjust] aimed at uncovering learners’
particular attributes (in three areas) and then responding appropriately to these variations.
Many pre-assessment tools are used to identify students’ readiness, interests, and learning
profiles. These tools can also spotlight particular misconceptions that students may harbour.
Without corrective feedback, progress and understanding will be hampered (Wiggins &
McTighe, 2005). The accumulated data also help teachers to make informed instructional
modifications to the content, process, product, and learning environment (Edugains, 2016b; Hall
et al., 2004). Thus, practical data collection systems must be seamlessly merged into “the daily
flow” of class routines (Lingo, Barton-Arwood, & Jolivette, 2011). Maple Bear teachers view this
step as a crucial starting point to ensure that students’ strengths and needs are addressed with
greater precision and effectiveness (MBGS Training Video: Cathy Gamble, 2021).

Figure 4. Learner Characteristics Guide Differentiation

DIFFERENTIATE
KNOW THE STUDENT RESPONSIVELY
Gather evidence about Adjust content, processes,
individuals' readiness, products & learning
interests & learning environments based on
profiles using multiple individuals' strengths &
assessment tools needs

Sources: Adapted from Doubet & Hockett, 2017; Edugains, 2016b; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Wiggins & McTighe,
2005


Readiness
Readiness refers to students’ knowledge and skills in relation to a specific curricular objective; it
is not the same as intellectual capacity or ability. Readiness levels are affected by an individual’s
background knowledge, experiences, and previous exposure to the topic. Hence, these levels can
seesaw markedly across subject areas (Tomlinson, 2014). Readiness differentiation is at work
when teachers present developmentally appropriate educational activities that are “in advance”
of children’s current stage of mastery (Zone of Proximal Development-ZPD, Vygotsky, 1978);
this means “raising the ceiling” for all students by supplying legitimate levels of scaffolding and
challenge. One tangible benefit is that they can directly connect their persistent efforts to
positive academic results (Byrdseed, 2009; Dweck, 2010; Utah State Board of Education &
Hanover Research, 2019). These tailored activities also help learners to bridge the gap between
dependence and independence.

The ZPD is defined as the distance between what students can do with and without assistance; it
is also known as “the sweet spot for learning” (Bell & Freeman, n.d.). Experts have indicated that
pinpointing “the student’s ZPD is of paramount importance if differentiated instruction is to
achieve its maximum impact” (Ontario Ministry of Education, Literacy & Numeracy Secretariat,
2008, p. 61). Therefore, it is imperative that appropriate supports and a viable route to success
are within reach; diluting content and lowering expectations are strongly discouraged (MBGS
Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015).
Maple Bear teachers grasp these realities and regularly “course-correct,” based on student
needs (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014). They construct stimulating lessons that include choice and
varying degrees of complexity, but the learning targets remain essentially the same (EL
Education, 2021b; Hall et al., 2004; The Iris Center, 2021). Equitable access to educational
activities and resources is a consistent priority. Vygotsky’s findings suggest that exemplary
curriculum: (1) integrates “real-life” learning tasks into the classroom, and (2) provides ample
opportunity for students to “flex” both their cognitive and social muscles (Daniels, 2017).

Figure 5. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development


Sources: Adapted from EL Education, 2021b; Future Learn & National STEM Learning Centre, n.d.

Differentiating for Readiness
Planning for differentiation can be vastly simplified if practitioners begin by scrutinizing
students’ unique traits from many angles (assessment for learning) (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014).
Reliable data- gathering mechanisms are a must. The use of pre-assessment (diagnostic) tools
allows teachers to anticipate how children will respond to new concepts and to make timely,
proactive plans. In short, these tools uncover students’ prior knowledge and experiences, reveal
each individual’s readiness level(s), and locate a suitable entry point for instruction (Chapman &
King, 2005; Edugains, 2016b). Other basic differences may also be unveiled: abilities,
motivations, interests, emotions and desires, multiple intelligences, attitudes toward topics, and
“hidden” talents (Chapman & King, 2005).

Teachers may choose to: assemble observational evidence (carousel or brainstorming activity);
analyze (in)formal test results (i.e., standardized test, unit pretest); review academic records;
check work samples; administer student self-audit measures; or ask the class to complete KWL
charts, graphic organizers, interviews, checklists, inventories, surveys, questionnaires, or
anticipation guides (Edugains, 2016b; Gregory & Chapman, 2012; The Iris Center, 2021). It is
vital that a variety of up-to-date information is assembled to inform and streamline classroom
management, curricular decision-making, and instructional approaches (Chapman & King,
2005). Readiness-based differentiation is highly malleable; it may include calculated changes in
scaffolding and challenge, task sophistication, tiering arrangements and organizational
structures, (in)dependent learning expectations, teacher-peer coaching, student (sub)groupings,
and lesson pacing (Doubet & Hockett, 2017; Edugains, 2016b; EL Education, 2021b; Gregory &
Chapman, 2012; Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015). The notion of a “growth mindset” is at play here
once again (Tomlinson, & Moon, 2013).

Interests
Interest refers to any number of skills, activities, and themes that students view as captivating
and personally relevant. Once interest-based formative assessments are complete and
compelling topics are identified, teachers are able to establish starting points and orient
instruction or arrange groupings, in ways that excite and motivate learners (Doubet & Hockett,
2017; Edugains, 2016b; Tomlinson, Moon, & Imbeau, 2015; Utah State Board of Education &
Hanover Research, 2019). When curiosity is piqued, students are far more likely to engage
meaningfully with new, more difficult content and attain their learning goals (The Iris Center,
2021). Carefully selected curricular subjects, matched to student interests and values, also have
the power to dramatically accelerate progress, engross reluctant learners, improve behaviour,
increase independence, and steer students towards academic excellence (Heacox & Strickland,
2012; MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools; Tomlinson & Moon,
2013).


When Maple Bear teachers tap into students’ interests, they can more readily set strategic goals,
implement approaches that are responsive to their diverse needs, and provide opportunities for
individuals to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding (MBGS Planning for Students
with Special Needs). Similarly, teachers recognize that meaningful learning ensues when novel
ideas are connected to concepts that are already familiar to the class (Bartlett, 1932; Rumelhart,
1980 – Schema Theory).

Differentiating for Interests
To fully address learner diversity, inclusive-minded practitioners make ongoing, intentional
adjustments to their instructional and assessment activities. Early in the year, teachers typically
build a detailed “educational portrait” for each student, to aid in their pedagogical decision-
making (Manitoba Education & Advanced Learning, 2015); these portraits change over time as
students evolve and mature. Attending to individual interests, for example, is one of the key
determinants of student success (Hall et al., 2004; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). Maple Bear
educators use this information to design engaging, “meaning-rich” programming that
harmonizes with the identified learner dimensions (strengths, cultures, prior experiences, etc.).
The goal of interest differentiation is to help students: (1) invest more time in their learning, (2)
“see themselves in the curriculum,” and (3) persevere when “the going gets tough” (Tomlinson
& Moon, 2013). Numerous differentiated data-collection instruments can be deployed for
planning purposes; a large repertoire of possibilities is available to classroom teachers: assistive
technology tools, anchor activities, interest inventories, the RAFT writing strategy, partner
introductions, Jigsaws, surveys, real-life/authentic assessments, ice breakers, small (expert)
groups, independent studies, open-ended questions, and interest stations (Strickland, 2007;
Tomlinson & Moon, 2013). Several of these techniques can also be used to explore students’
learning profiles.

Learning Profiles
Learning profile refers to the factors that affect how individuals: (1) absorb information; (2)
process, retain, and engage with content; and (3) demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills
(Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018; Tomlinson & Moon, 2013); student profiles are shaped by four
interrelated features (Tomlinson, 2004). These include learning styles, gender, culture, and
intelligence preferences. Thus, Maple Bear teachers believe that learning-profile differentiation
is an essential ingredient for teaching in ways that are proficient, meaningful, and effective
(MBGS Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools). They understand that any
classroom presents with a range of dynamic profile features; a mismatch between individuals’
learning tendencies and the delivery of instruction can hinder achievement (EL Education,
2021c; Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018). Helping students to discover what approaches and conditions
work best for them is also a key focus (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). To capture a personalized
snapshot of learner traits, teachers may choose to generate student profiles and class profiles
(Edugains, 2016b). These types of informal assessments serve a dual purpose; they act as a
“referencing” tool for planning subsequent lessons and as a tracking tool for checking progress
(Gregory & Kuzmich, 2014).


Figure 6. Learning Preferences Continuum Assessment Chart

Conformity Creativity
Part-to-Whole Whole-to-Part
Competition Collaboration
On-Demand Response Reflective Response
Written Expression Multi-Modal Expression
Work Independently Work Together
Still or Silence Movement or Sound
Controlled Expressive
Concrete Abstract
Analytical Practical

Source: Adapted from Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018
Differentiating for Learning Profiles:
Differentiated instruction makes it easier for educators to reach all learners; wise interpretation
of “profile” data provides an invaluable lens for planning and presenting customized educational
activities (Heacox & Strickland, 2012). However, there is little benefit to affixing rigid labels to
students; most individuals respond quite readily to a variety of teaching and learning
approaches (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018). By exposing students to a menu of differentiated
options, they are able to extend their learning repertoires and apply newly acquired strategies
more capably, across subject areas. To promote greater success, teachers might choose to:
(1) present material in visual, auditory, and kinesthetic modalities; (2) select exemplars,
applications, and images from a broad range of cultures, communities, and intelligences
(Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences); (3) employ “whole-to-part” and “part-to-whole” instructional
modes; (4) introduce “wait time” as a means to facilitate reflection; (5) engineer tasks that
enable participation and the sharing of diverse opinions; (6) arrange opportunities for students
to collaborate with peers (pairs, small groups); (7) develop flexible projects that permit
students to express their knowledge in different ways; (8) build assignments that have “real-
world” applications [problem-based learning]; (9) reconfigure the learning space to
accommodate identified preferences; and (10) invite students to brainstorm classroom
“climate” expectations, that affirm the notions of respect, acceptance, equity, safety, belonging,
and awareness of self and others (Edugains, 2016b; Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018; Strickland, 2007;
Tomlinson & Strickland, 2005).

(D) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Backward Design Framework
Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. has developed a continuum of effective supports to facilitate
learning for all students; the continuum is represented in the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model. As
noted earlier, this model is based on research tied to inclusion, differentiated instruction and
assessment, UDL, individual and classroom profiles, learning strategies, teamwork and
collaboration, and backward design (MBGS Planning for Students with Special Needs; MBGS
Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools).

Sousa and Tomlinson (2011) suggest that If teachers expect students to apply their skills
prudently, memorization is an undependable way to realize that objective. Individuals often fail
to internalize information that is “drilled into their brains,” through rote recall (“superficial or
surface learning”). Students are also less likely to consistently connect, apply, or transfer any
“new knowledge” that they do not fully comprehend (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2011). The backward
design framework provides a viable path forward.

Figure 7. Stages of Backward Design

1. Identify Desired
• Big Ideas & Skills
Results
2. Establish • Culminating Assessment

Acceptable Activities
Evidence
3. Plan Learning
• Academic
Experiences &
Tasks
Instruction

Source: Adapted from Wiggins & McTighe, 2005

Backward design is not a teaching philosophy or approach; it is a flexible planning framework,
that places learning outcomes at the forefront. At its essence, backward design is a handy, goal-
oriented, curriculum development roadmap. The framework’s overarching idea of “beginning
with the end in mind” drives the structuring of curriculum, instruction, and assessment
(Wiggins & McTIghe, 2005). Inquiry-based planning is recommended; this means setting up
opportunities for students to read, experiment, research, discuss, debate, and construct
meaning, by zeroing in on the “essential questions” or “big ideas” contained in the unit or lesson
(Brownlie & Schnellert, 2009; Edugains, 2016b; McTighe & Wiggins, 2011). In differentiated
classrooms, teachers also ensure that all learners are exploring the same “essential” ideas or
core concepts; responsive layers of challenge and scaffolding are added to support each
individual’s developmental stage (Tomlinson & Moon, 2013). Thus, students can access the
curriculum in various ways and demonstrate their learning through multiple avenues of
representation (Edugains, 2016b; McTighe & Wiggins, 2011).


Wiggins and McTighe (2005) offer a sequence of questions to support teachers’ decision-making
as they move through this process: (1) What do I want students to learn? (2) How will I know
they are learning? (3) How will I design instruction-assessment tasks to enhance learning? and
(4) What will I do when students are not learning?

Three Stages of Backward Design
The backward design framework includes three critical stages: (1) identify desired outcomes
(2) determine acceptable evidence; and (3) plan learning experiences and instruction. For each
of these steps, there are benchmarks to help guide design procedures. Nimble educational
professionals are able to use this straightforward, three-phase planning tool to underline clear
goals and expectations, connect learning tasks to the chosen outcomes, and gauge progress with
reliable success criteria (Doubet & Hockett, 2017; Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015).

Figure 8. Lesson & Unit Planning Sequence: Stages 1 – 3

Stage 1: Identify Desired Results
- Identify learning goals & priorities
- Study content standards
- Review overarching curricular expectations
- Emphasize “big ideas” (core concepts)

Questions:
1. What should students know, understand & be able to
do?
2. What content is worthy of understanding?
3. What “enduring understandings” are sought?

Stage 2: Determine Acceptable Evidence
- “Think like an assessor” before designing
units/lessons
- Develop assessment criteria for each learning
goal
- Select formative & summative assessment tools

Questions:
1. How will I know if students achieve the desired
result?
2. What is suitable proof of understanding &
proficiency?

* It’s not about covering content & doing many
activities.

Continuum of Assessment Tools

Continuum activities differ in scope (simple to complex), duration (short- to long-term), setting
(decontextualized to authentic contexts), and form (from high- to non-structured). “Assessment for
understanding” is a data-gathering process, unfolding over time (not one test at the end of the unit).

Stage 3: Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction

- Plan with “the end in mind” (activities align with goals & assessment)
- Activate prior knowledge to maximize engagement
- Differentiate lesson sequence for successful completion of tasks
- Choose effective strategies, structures & processes for teaching, practice, feedback & self-audits
- Prepare students to experience & explore key ideas
- Tailor tasks & assessments to readiness, interests & profiles (to drive progress & next steps)
Questions:

1. What enabling knowledge (facts, concepts, principles) will students need to achieve the desired
results?
2. What enabling skills (processes, procedures, strategies) will students need to perform
effectively?
2. What differentiated activities will equip students with the key background knowledge & skills for
success?
3. What concepts will need to be taught, practised & re-taught?
5. What adaptive materials & resources are best suited to accomplish the target goals?

Sources: Adapted from Bowen, 2017; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Wiggins & McTighe, 2002, 2004, 2005

Final Note About Backward Design:
Enhanced learning tends to occur if it is grounded in a limited number of “core concepts”
(Brownlie & Schnellert, 2009). Therefore, pedagogical decisions about methods, lesson
sequencing, and resource materials can be made more effectively, once educators understand
that “teaching is a means to an end.” Without a crystal-clear understanding of key learning
objectives and “good” assessment evidence and practices, it is much more difficult to proceed
with differentiated planning (Wiggins & McTighe, 2002). Throughout the learning process, we
must ensure that instructional-assessment methods correspond with the targeted knowledge,
skills, and lesson expectations (Edugains, 2016b).


(E) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
Given the unique nature of students in multi-dimensional classrooms, teachers must find novel
ways to reshape curriculum, tailor instructional delivery methods, and orchestrate assessment
procedures that allow all learners to be exposed to the same content and reach reasonable
levels of mastery of topics and skills. Ensuring that students are “firing on all cylinders” is not
easy, but it is achievable; Universal Design for Learning (UDL) offers a feasible solution.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a theoretical “blueprint” that is intended to guide the
design and development of educational environments, that accelerate growth and minimize
school barriers (Hall et al., 2004; Rose & Meyer, 2002; Thousand et al., 2014; UDL-IRN, 2020). It
is not an “add-on.” Rather, UDL-based planning involves the creation of curricular, instructional,
and assessment activities that are responsive to a potpourri of individual preferences and
challenges. Students of all stripes can reap the benefits.

UDL also stresses the idea of “beginning with the end in mind.” Backward design and UDL work
in tandem and intersect with the Three-Tiered Pyramid Model (MBGS Planning for Students with
Special Needs; MB Understanding & Guiding Behaviour: A Resource for Schools). This fusion of
foundational concepts serves as a “pedagogical anchor;” it is also compatible with Maple Bear’s
overarching commitment to crafting and implementing exemplary programs, maintaining high
expectations, and providing equal access for a full spectrum of students (MBGS Global Schools
Quality Assurance Handbook, 2021). MBGS teachers understand that UDL is one of the main
building blocks in lesson development and inclusion is the centrepiece.

UDL Principles & Guidelines
Unlike a retrofitted teaching process, which begins after lessons are underway and learning
problems arise, the UDL framework equips educators with a set of anticipatory “lenses” that can
be used to diversify educational goals, methods, materials, and assessments, at the outset
(Doubet & Hockett. 2017; Thousand et al., 2014). When used judiciously, UDL is a powerful
vehicle for strengthening decision-making and boosting success for a wider array of students
(CAST, 2021; Rose & Meyer, 2002). Thus, the development of “expert learners” can be facilitated
if teachers adhere to the suggested UDL principles (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017). More recently,
these principles have been supplemented with a set of additional recommendations: The
Universal Design for Learning Guidelines (Rose, Meyer, & Gordon, 2014). These versatile design
tools include tangible strategies for use across the curriculum; both can be readily aligned with
individual strengths and needs (CAST, 2021; Rose et al., 2014).


Table 3. The Three UDL Principles

Principle I: The “What” of Learning – Provide Multiple Means of Representation

We know that students differ in the ways that they perceive and internalize information.
Therefore, the goal is to offer learners a variety of adaptable options for acquiring knowledge
and interpreting information (i.e., “considerate” texts, graphs, charts, illustrations, videos,
demos, manipulatives, etc.).

Principle II: The “How” of Learning – Provide Multiple Means of Expression & Action

We know that students differ in the ways that they navigate a learning context and express
what they know. Therefore, the goal is to offer learners a variety of adjustable options for
processing and responding to information (i.e., writing, multimedia, demonstration, etc.).

Principle III: The “Why” of Learning – Provide Multiple Means of Engagement

We know that students differ in the ways they can be challenged, engaged, and motivated to
learn. Therefore, the goal is to use a variety of teaching methods that foster learner interest
and participation.

Sources: Adapted from CAST, 2021; Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017; Rose & Meyer, 2002

Role of Technology
UDL and differentiation are useful tools for elevating inclusive practices, addressing a myriad of
learning needs, and catapulting students closer to performance mastery (Hall, Meyer, & Rose,
2012; Manitoba Education & Advanced Learning, 2015). The introduction of technology, into the
classroom, certainly has obvious benefits, but it is not a panacea. Maple Bear teachers agree that
it must be leveraged astutely to trigger substantive academic gains (Best & 3P Learning, 2020;
CAST, 2021; Edmonton Public Schools, 2013). The inherent functionality and flexibility of
technology (high- & low-tech) also allow teachers to more readily: (1) personalize educational
experiences, (2) mitigate various learning obstacles, and (3) optimize students’ ability to
interact with information, actively participate in activities, and articulate newly acquired
understanding and insight (Hall et al., 2004; Rose, Gravel, & Domings, 2012).


Figure 9. The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines

Sources: Adapted from CAST, 2011; 2021; Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017; Rose & Meyer, 2002; Understood for All, 2019

Table 4. Student-Friendly UDL Learning Activities

Engagement Options: The goal is to use a variety of methods to motivate and challenge students.

Auditory Visual Tactile Affective Technology

-Listen to read -Add novelty -Manipulatives -Cover topics of -Recording
aloud (props) -Build a model student interest -Word processing
-Debate -Post goal(s) -Use response -Work alone, with -Data spreadsheet
-Discuss -Chart progress card(s) peer, cooperative -Create video
-Verbal prompts -List steps -Use game format groups -Video conference
-Talk through -Visual schedule -Outdoor activity -Positive feedback -Blog, text message
the steps -Design poster -Build in -Mentors -Zoom
-Song or rap - movement
-Oral storytelling Illustration/photo -Role play

Presentation Options: The goal is to provide students with different ways to receive and interpret
information.

-Lecture -Read articles & -Take a field trip -Present to large -Projector
-Oral talk (in books -Draw and small groups -Smartboard
character) -Watch -Sculpture -1-to-1 -Digital book
-Sing video/slideshow -Construction presentation -Video & DVD
-Read aloud -Present work -Play a game -Cross-age tutoring -TV (closed captioning)
-Guided reading (graph, chart, -Role play -Podcasts
poster) -Connect to
interests

Expression Options: The goal is to provide students with different ways to organize and respond to
information.

-Oral report -Visual demo -Experiment -Group -Recording
-Speech and (chart) demo presentation -Multimedia project
debate -Written report -Dance -Drama/play -Podcast
-Song or rap -Drawing/poster -Written report -Role play -eBook
-Storytelling -Portfolio -Point at the -Demonstration -Photo essay
-Retell -Journal/diary answer -Typed report
expository text -Mural -Bubble sheets -Electronic assessment
-Interview -Puppet
show/arts


Sources: Adapted from Edmonton Public Schools, 2013; Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017

Final Note About UDL Implementation
It is important to anticipate learner variability and make instructional changes that are
responsive to individual needs. Teachers should: (1) begin with clear, specific goals, (2) provide
flexible means to achieve goals, (3) ensure that all learners can access the classroom and
learning materials, (4) make learning personally relevant, (5) promote high expectations and
performance, (6) support academic risk-taking, (7) offer time for active reflection on learning
and engagement, (7) share (non) examples, (8) increase opportunities for collaboration, (9)
ensure resources and supports match task and learner characteristics, (10) incorporate
authentic, relevant experiences, (11) provide frequent feedback, (12) present flexible
assessment alternatives, and (13) minimize disruptions (CAST, 2016, 2020a).

Table 5. Differentiated Technology-Based Tools

No Tech Low-Tech High-Tech

• Walker/Cane • Highlighters/Rubber grips to • “Talking” calculators
• Braille turn pages • Interactive white board-
• Pencil grips/Weighted • Weighted pencils, magnetic touchscreen
pen paper weights • Spell checkers/word
• Raised-line paper • Oral exams, taped lectures & prediction
• Magnifying glass responses • Text-to-speech software
• Tactile letters • Calculators & dictionaries • Speech-recognition
• Sticky notes • Quiet room, extra time software
• Slanted surfaces • Manipulatives, adaptive • Read-aloud devices [e-
• Communication boards scissors reader]
• Number line • Copy of assignment • Mouse, trackpad, joystick
• Graphic • Copy of peer’s notes • Braille input & output
organizer/Reading guide • Visual timers • Screen readers &
• Scribe • Audiobooks magnifiers
• Closed Captioning • Learning apps [read &
• Alerting devices [buzzers] write, etc.]
• Augmentative
communication devices
• Voice-activated devices

Source: Adapted from Edmonton Public Schools, 2013


(F) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Assessment

Assessment and instruction work in concert. Without comprehensive data detailing students’
unique characteristics, educators will lack clear direction and be “instructionally rudderless.”
This understanding is firmly embedded in the DNA of “good” teachers. It also shapes the
bedrock upon which exemplary, differentiated practice is built. In a similar vein, Tomlinson and
Moon (2013) see assessment as “the compass for daily planning in a differentiated classroom”
(p. 8).

Purposes of Differentiated Assessment
Assessment serves multiple purposes at Maple Bear schools. One of its most important functions
is to enhance academic success. Teachers are able to reach this goal by creating, delivering, and
adjusting a continuum of assessment scaffolds and strategies, aimed at empowering student
learning, spurring active participation, and cultivating a healthy, barrier-free learning climate.
High-calibre materials and approaches must be flexible in nature to address the evolving needs,
increase accessibility, and optimize individual strengths. To be most effective, continuous
planning is undertaken before instruction commences, during instruction as learning unfolds,
and after lessons and units are concluded (Chapman & King, 2005; Ontario Ministry of
Education, 2010). Advocates and experts have widely accepted that assessment is the chief
driver of differentiated instructional decision-making and practice (BC Ministry of Education,
2017; MBGS Global Schools Quality Assurance Handbook, 2021; MBGS Training Video: Cathy
Gamble, 2021; Stiggins, 2005).

Principles of Differentiated Assessment
Assessment and instruction form a vital symbiotic relationship. This relationship constitutes the
heart of the differentiated teaching approach. To create “equalitarian learning spaces” and
ensure optimum benefit for student success, Maple Bear teachers espouse a number of
fundamental truths. First, students bring a kaleidoscope of learning experiences and behaviours
to school every day. Second, to fully address the diversity of strengths and needs in the
classroom, strategic educators begin by assuming the roles of “master” assessor and data
collector; data must be compiled and carefully reviewed. Third, once teachers “know” the
children, they are well positioned to design effective programming that corresponds with
learner preferences and curricular objectives. Finally, the ultimate goal is not to devise separate,
education plans for each individual; but rather provide adjustable, differentiated opportunities
that are advantageous to ALL (Learn Alberta, 2010). Several UDL-inspired principles have been
suggested to manage this important planning process (CAST, 2015; Learn Alberta, 2002, 2010;
MBGS Training Video: Cathy Gamble, 2021; NSW Education Standards Authority, 2021e). These
principles are as follows:

1. Assessment protocols are determined by Maple Bear’s educational objectives and the
organization’s inclusive vision, values, beliefs, and philosophy of teaching and learning.
2. Assessment results are reviewed frequently to provide direction for launching responsive
programs and strategies, that focus on skill-building, understanding, and success; many
assessment activities are firmly embedded into daily classroom practices.

3. Maple Bear teachers encourage students to actively engage in the assessment process; this
has a positive impact on the class (i.e., academically, socially, emotionally).
4. A selection of developmentally appropriate assessment approaches is used, based on
students’ level of need and challenge.
5. Maple Bear teachers regularly share timely, constructive feedback with students and
parents; ongoing, meaningful feedback accelerates learning.

Table 6. How to Plan for Differentiated Assessment

To plan versatile assessment activities & exercises, teachers should:

Þ Assemble data before, during & after Þ Involve students in assessing personal
teaching and learning experiences progress and pinpointing emerging
Þ Evaluate evidence to identify a student’s trouble spots
needs, strengths & level of engagement Þ Incorporate appropriate digital tools into
Þ Integrate assessment information into the assessment process to enable student
differentiated teaching and learning success
procedures Þ Take time to reflect on practice and adjust
Þ Choose compatible assessment accordingly
instruments that allow students to Þ Add barrier-reducing strategies into the
demonstrate their skills general operations of the classroom
Þ Include versatile methods that provide Þ Clarify learning instructions and
meaningful, instructional clues for next expectations (rubrics, success criteria,
steps etc.)
Þ Mobilize resources and stimulus materials Þ Detect and correct any myths &
that will “move the needle” on student misconceptions that students may
learning harbour
Þ Present authentic opportunities to Þ Collaborate with colleagues to brainstorm
challenge students (within their ZPD) responsive assessment techniques
Þ Share individualized feedback to identify Þ Closely align assessments with Maple
strengths and areas for improvement Bear’s designated learning goals
Þ Accommodate student needs through Þ Determine “differentiated-specific
flexible planning and data-driven avenues” for learning and success
problem-solving

Sources: Adapted from CAST, 2020a; Doubet & Hockett. 2017; Learn Alberta, 2002, 2010; Manitoba Education &
Training, 2015; Salvia et al., 2015; UDL-IRN, 2018


Teacher Responsibilities in Differentiated Assessment

To unlock the potential of every student, teachers must think and act proactively, relative to
learning differences. At Maple Bear, teachers demonstrate a shared commitment to using
various assessment techniques and instruments that are sensitive enough to capture a range of
student knowledge, skills, and attitudes (i.e., teacher-made tests, interest surveys, anecdotal
evidence, performance-based activities, checklists, interviews, school history, etc.).

Three Types of Assessment Techniques
To effectively challenge the broad scope of learners who are attending Maple Bear schools,
teachers must become keen observers and adept data gatherers. This process involves the use
of three types of assessment measures: Assessment for learning [AFL],
Assessment as learning [AAL], and Assessment of learning [AOL] (Ontario Ministry of
Education, 2010). These tools facilitate the collection of evidence about students’ interpersonal
behaviours, family and friends, self-monitoring abilities, mastery levels, likes and dislikes,
technology-based needs and interests, motivations, proximity to desired learning objectives,
hobbies, heritage, skill development, preferences, autonomy and independence, critical thinking
capacity, “hidden” talents, learning gaps and barriers, and self-confidence (Manitoba Education
& Youth, 1996). The diagnostic information helps teachers to make curricula more accessible,
uncover precise evidence of aptitudes and readiness levels, refine pedagogical choices, and
infuse timely, supportive interventions (coaching, descriptive feedback, etc.), aimed at rectifying
erroneous opinions and reinforcing learning targets (Hall et al., 2004; NSW Education Standards
Authority, 2021b). All three assessment measures: (1) prioritize an inclusive, flexible approach
to data collection; (2) reflect an enduring belief that all students can achieve; and (3) include
well-defined, realistic learning targets (based on MB curricular standards).

Figure 10. Characteristics of Effective Assessment

Sources: Adapted from Chapman & King, 2005; Lazarus et al., 2009; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010


Assessment for Learning [AFL]
Assessment for learning is also known as formative assessment or pre-assessment. The AFL
approach takes place before beginning a lesson or unit; it uses reliable evidence to gain a better
understanding of students’ knowledge and skills; this information helps to effectively guide the
teaching-learning process (BC Ministry of Education, 2017). These assessment activities can be
differentiated to accommodate individuals’ readiness, interests, and learning profiles. Stiggins
(2005) asserts that education practitioners who adopt an AFL approach, to drive their
instructional practice, are able to “promote maximum student success” (p. 328).

The assessment for learning strategy:
• provides multi-dimensional insight into current levels of functioning (across domains)
• embeds opportunities for practical, constructive feedback to enhance motivation &
performance
• allows teachers to be more responsive to changes in students’ learning needs
• is deployed at regular intervals during the year, as students evolve and mature
• aims to help all students learn more proficiently (not just earn better grades)
• involves formal & informal assessment activities as part of the learning experience
• unveils gaps in knowledge & students’ readiness to move into the next phase of learning
• informs the planning of next steps (accommodating needs and challenges)
• is adaptable to whole-class or individual learning situations (BC Ministry of Education, 2017;
CAST, 2020a; Centre for Innovation & Excellence in Learning, 2019; Doubet & Hockett. 2017;
MB Training Video: Cathy Gamble, 2021; NSW Education Standards Authority, 2021b;
Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).

Assessment as Learning [AAL]
Assessment as learning is another type of formative assessment, that occurs during a lesson or
unit. The AAL approach concentrates on strengthening children’s metacognitive skills, so they
can become their own assessors. Once these skills are sharpened, individuals are able to
calculate the effectiveness of their learning choices and habits, then make subsequent course
corrections. In other words, students exert deliberate control over the strategies they use to
self-question, access prior knowledge, and make meaning. Under the careful direction of the
teacher, students can also isolate personal areas of strength and need and develop more self-
sufficiency and autonomy, as their learning journeys unfold (BC Ministry of Education, 2017;
Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).

The assessment as learning strategy:
• focuses on teaching students how to take responsibility for their own education
• assists individuals to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategies they select to support
learning
• helps to enhance students’ educational risk-taking behaviours and overall “academic health”
• expects students to gauge performance against exemplars and itemized rubrics or checklists
• builds self-assessment & peer assessment into classroom routines

• creates opportunities for students to self-advocate

• encourages proactive problem-solving as learning progresses
• boosts independence, motivation, and confidence
• improves students’ ability to locate necessary tools & supports to realize learning objectives
• promotes growth and success (BC Ministry of Education, 2017; NSW Education Standards
Authority, 2021b; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).
Assessment of Learning [AOL]
Assessment of learning is also known as summative assessment. It usually happens after a
lesson or unit is complete, but may include mid-term projects, quizzes, tests, and exams. AOL
results are used largely in report card preparation and as a ranking device (Centre for
Innovation & Excellence in Learning, 2019; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010). This kind of
assessment is based on an accumulated set of data; these data are used to rate performance and
skill development.

The assessment of learning strategy:
• assumes that grading criteria have been shared with students (before the new lesson/unit
starts)
• assists teachers in analyzing data and judge achievement against prescribed standards and
goals
• includes exams, portfolios, projects, oral & written work products, and performance tasks
• necessitates the use of reliable (valid) evaluation tools
• supports teachers’ pedagogical decision-making and planning efforts in the creation of
diverse, responsive avenues to learning
• provides evidence of achievement to multiple stakeholders (i.e., parents, educators,
students)
• involves the use of quality, timely feedback (BC Ministry of Education, 2017; CAST, 2020a;
Centre for Innovation & Excellence in Learning, 2019; Doubet & Hockett. 2017; NSW
Education Standards Authority, 2021b; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).


Table 7. Differentiating in Testing Situations

Method of Response Setting Method of Scheduling/Timing
Presentation

-Provide word bank on -Test in separate -Use large-print or -Provide extended
the test location Braille time
-Use scrap paper for -Test individual/small -Increase white space -Provide unlimited
calculations groups on page time
-Dictate answers on -Give preferential -Increase size of -Test over multiple
digital device seating (carrels, answer spaces days
-Provide scribe adaptive furniture) -Decrease # of items -Adjust testing
-Respond using assistive -Use adaptive per page order
technology equipment -Test orally -Schedule breaks
-Use computer for -Adjust acoustics & -Simplify
copying tasks lights instructions/cues
-Eliminate -Present one sentence
distractions per line

Source: Adapted from Friend & Bursuck, 2019; NSW Education Standards Authority, 2021b

(G) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Lesson Development
Maple Bear classrooms are stimulating, affirming, safe, and challenging. Lessons are taught to
the whole group initially. In these inclusive settings, learning is viewed as a multi-faceted
journey on which all are invited to participate. Educators establish the destination; locate a
universal [common] entry point; and engineer expedient, purposeful routes to success; all
phases of a differentiated lesson are structured around the idiosyncratic nature of student needs
and predispositions [“Assess-Plan-Instruct-Repeat”] (MBGS Training Video: Cathy Gamble,
2021). Thus, it is expected that teachers intentionally weave students’ unique goals into both
the instructional-assessment process and the content-area topics under study. This scaffolded,
proactive approach acts as a pliable vehicle through which students can be adequately
supported and learning outcomes can be effectively achieved (Eaton & Saskatchewan Valley
School Division, 1996; Tomlinson, 2000a). Put simply, practitioners must accumulate “facts”
about individual variabilities and then customize “respectful” content, work products, resource
materials, and implementation strategies, in ways that increase access and “sense-making”
potential, and empower students to advance along their own learning continuum (Gregory &

Chapman, 2012; Thousand et al., 2014). Such advancements are more likely if precise goals are
established, learner traits are identified, tailored assessments are included, flexible classroom
tasks are determined, and teacher reflection is practised (Tomlinson & Allan, 2000a, 2000b;
UDL-IRN, 2018). The following lesson-development planning tool contains these rudimentary
features and closely mirrors UDL and backward design foundational principles.

Figure 11. Differentiated Lesson Planning Summary: What Teachers Do

Sources: Adapted from Edugains, 2016b; Heacox & Strickland, 2012; Tomlinson, 2000a, 2004; Tomlinson & Allan,
2000a, 2000b; Tomlinson & Moon, 2013; UDL-IRN, 2018


(H) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Strategy Selection

Mindset can influence a person’s educational trajectory. Students’ work ethic, determination,
and commitment to learning have an enormous effect on their growth (Tomlinson, & Moon,
2013). Likewise, many academic difficulties are not necessarily the result of heredity or
deficiency, but rather a lack of opportunity, negative self-concept, or poor use of skills and
strategies (Dweck, 2010; Yeager & Dweck, 2012). Therefore, it is logical to institute responsive
practices that shatter any attitudinal or organizational barriers and build on student strengths
(Heacox & Strickland, 2012).

If educators incorporate the combined wisdom of backward design, UDL, and differentiation,
into their practice, they are armed with a rich repertoire of strategies that tap into the potential
of the class. But before introducing any new approach, it is wise to consider how learning
unfolds. In other words, teachers need to: (1) prepare students to receive information
(activating strategies); (2) plan structured lessons that enhance intellectual dexterity (acquiring
strategies), and (3) choose valid ways to gauge student understanding, progress, and transfer
abilities (consolidating strategies) (CAST, 2020b; Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996). Many
inclusion experts recommend strategy instruction as a powerful addition to the practitioner’s
teaching arsenal (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996; Reid & Lienemann, 2006; Swanson, 1996).
Why?

The strategy instruction method has a longstanding, well-documented record of success; it gives
teachers a valuable “pedagogical map.” Effective implementation of the suggested steps can
markedly impact achievement and stifle maladaptive classroom behaviours, such as “learned
helplessness” (Reid & Lienemann, 2006). The ultimate goal is to ensure that students’ use of the
strategy becomes “habitual, flexible, and automatic” (Reid & Lienemann, 2006); successful
execution of learning strategies necessitates both “cognitive skill and motivational will”
(Schmidt & Paris, 1983). When exposed to “sense-making” techniques, in the “right” way,
students are able to wrestle with ideas, leverage new knowledge, and efficiently digest and
apply it across the curriculum (Doubet & Hockett. 2017; Pressley & Woloshyn, 1995; Swanson,
1996). Tiered scaffolds and supports are put in place (as needed) to encourage greater
understanding, skill acquisition, and access to curricular resources (Learn Alberta, 2013). To
solidify student usage of a new learning strategy, teachers must adopt a systematic, step-by-step
instructional approach (one strategy at a time).


Table 8. Strategy Instruction Step-By-Step

Explain It. Explain explicitly each step of the strategy
Include the how, when, where & why

Model It. Model the strategy while “thinking aloud”
Include all of the steps & metacognitive/self-correction processes

Teach It. Teach the steps of the strategy
Include the rationale (build understanding)

Use it. Provide guided practice opportunities to use the strategy (with
support)
Include the strategy in authentic class activities (discuss benefits)

Review It Review the steps of the strategy
[Reteach] Include independent practice opportunities in authentic class
activities
Provide corrective feedback, scaffolds & prompts

Rehearse It Students rehearse the strategy to promote mastery
[Practise] Include more independent practice in authentic class activities

Evaluate It. Students evaluate their use of the strategy (self-monitoring)
Include opportunities to teach the strategy to peers

Transfer It. Create new learning situations to test transfer of the strategy

* Students need to fully internalize a strategy before learning a new one.

Sources: Adapted from Alberta Learning, 2002; Manitoba Education & Training, 1996; Pressley & Woloshyn, 1995;
Reid & Lienemann, 2006; The Iris Center, 2013


Table 9. Differentiated Teaching Strategies List

Section 4: Glossary of Differentiated Concepts and Strategies

3-2-1 Summary Strategy. The 3-2-1 strategy is a comprehension strategy that helps students
to organize and summarize ideas. Learners determine 3 new discoveries, 2 interesting facts, and
1 enduring question, after reviewing a text or a video. Teachers can choose to use this technique
to assess learning or as a pre-writing activity. The teacher introduces the content, short passage,
article, or video and then asks the class to engage with the information (i.e., read-aloud, partner
reading, independent reading, etc.) (Enome Inc., 2013).

Ability. Ability refers to a student’s overall capacity as a learner; it is usually understood to be
fixed across time, content-areas, and knowledge and skills (Doubet & Hockett. 2017).

Accommodations. Accommodations are designed to increase access to school activities; they
are the instructional-assessment strategies and/or individualized equipment that students need
to learn and to demonstrate knowledge and understanding (i.e., timing, setting, presentation,
response). The intent is to “level the playing field” (not to give unfair advantage); it is the
“functional limitations,” associated with the disabling condition, that drive the accommodation
process. Grade-level, curricular expectations remain unchanged (Ontario Ministry of Education,
2013).

Acquiring Strategies. Acquiring strategies are designed to help students access, process, and
integrate information with what they already know. Then they revise previous knowledge and
articulate any new understandings (i.e., active listening, speaking, reading, writing, viewing,
representing). Teachers are expected to monitor these activities to ensure that learning is taking
place (observations, conferences, work products). This phase includes the following steps: (1)
set the purpose (overviews, learning logs, admit slips); (2) present information (guest speakers,
mini-lessons, reading, viewing, listening); (3) process information (note-taking, debates,
journals, visuals); (4) modelling (role-play, think-alouds, demonstrations); (5) checks of
understanding (quizzes, Think-Pair-Share, conferences); and (6) practise (guided practice,
rehearsals) (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996).

Activating Strategies. Activating strategies are designed to prepare students for learning.
These strategies help to stimulate curiosity, correct misconceptions, build prior knowledge,
identify skill gaps, and link the “new to the known” (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996).

Anchor Activities. Anchor activities provide meaningful, content-specific, goal-oriented work
for students who have completed assigned tasks. High-quality anchor activities are engaging
(not rote practice) and stress clearly defined, “essential” learning goals; they are tiered or
differentiated (based on student readiness, interests, learning profiles), and include a reliable
monitoring system. Anchor activities address a broad range of needs and vary from concrete to
abstract, structured to open-ended, and simple to complex (i.e., puzzles or riddles, graphic
organizers, advertisements, learning packets, activity boxes, story or expository writing, comics
or illustrations, listening stations, etc.) (Preszler, 2006; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2013).


Anticipation Guides. Anticipation guides are used to help students make predictions (based on
their prior knowledge). Teachers provide the class with a list of 5 to 10 statements linked to the
topic under study. Learners decide if they agree or disagree with each statement. After the
lesson, students discuss new insights (NL Department of Education, n.d.).

Assistive Technology. Assistive technology can help students, who experience difficulties, to
fully participate in the classroom. These technologies are far-reaching; they include anything
from a low-tech pencil grip to high-tech augmentative communication supports (Poel, 2007).

Big Ideas. Big ideas are the core concepts or principles, in content-area subjects, that help
students to acquire knowledge through engagement in a large range of educational experiences
(McTighe & Wiggins, 2005).

Calming Space. A calming space is a quiet area of the classroom that is equipped with soft
furnishings and soothing materials, to support the de-escalation and re-focusing of individuals,
who are experiencing distress. Teachers debrief with students after the calming period (Alberta
Education, 2008).

Centres/Stations. This flexible strategy includes various tasks (in rotating or stationary
centres), that are arranged throughout the learning space. It is important to note that learning
centres are not considered differentiated if all children are engaged in exactly the same way.
Although there are common learning goals, instructional approaches must be adjusted, based on
individual readiness, interests, or learning tendencies. In this kind of context, students have
opportunities to build independence and academic competency across subject areas (Edugains,
2016b).

Choice Boards. Choice boards are common differentiation structures that can be used to
promote learning and measure progress. Like many other DI strategies, tasks must be designed
in a way to enable all students to pursue the same learning goals. Choice boards can be easily
adjusted to different content areas or student need (readiness, interest, or learning preferences)
(Edugains, 2016b).

Chunking. Chunking relates to organizing educational material into manageable parts to make
it more accessible to students (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).
Class Profiles. Class profiles are used by teachers, as information-gathering and assessment
tools. These tools provide a “snapshot” of each student’s unique characteristics and the
strategies and resources that are needed to promote learning and success (Ontario Ministry of
Education, 2013).

Cloze Strategy. Cloze is a powerful comprehension strategy that is suitable for any grade or age.
The teacher begins with removing words from a passage and then students attempt to fill-in-
the-blanks by using their higher-order thinking skills, vocabulary, prior experience, and
knowledge of syntax. It is recommended that teachers leave the first and last sentences
unchanged. Word banks can also be provided to further support struggling readers (Enome, Inc.,
2021).

Collaboration. Decision-making and problem-solving are at the heart of collaboration.
Addressing diverse academic-social needs and maximizing student learning, in inclusive
classrooms, necessitates the combined expertise of all educational stakeholders (teachers,
administrators, parents, etc.) (Tomlinson, 2014).

Considerate text. A “considerate text” is a text that facilitates comprehension and learning from
reading. The notion of considerate texts applies primarily to expository-print materials, in
which the author’s main objective is to help students acquire new knowledge from reading. In
school learning situations, content-area textbooks are the most common form of informational
texts (Anderson & Armbruster, 1984).

Consolidating (Applying) Strategies. Consolidating strategies are used to assess and to give
students opportunities to demonstrate, internalize, restructure, employ, and extend newly
acquired knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Consolidation competencies are built through
activities involving reflection (i.e., learning logs, exit slips); closure (i.e., sharing of products,
debriefing on processes); and application (i.e., performances, publications, problem-based
learning projects) (Manitoba Education & Youth, 1996).

Constructivism. Constructivism refers to the idea that learning occurs as children are actively
involved in the process of knowledge and meaning construction, rather than passively
assimilating information. Constructivist teaching builds students’ motivation and critical
thinking. Significant learning seems to be facilitated when individuals are engaged and
interacting with one another in the classroom (Prawat & Floden, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978).

Cooperative Learning. Cooperative learning occurs when small groups of students engage in
structured activities (to achieve a common goal). The level of collective effort determines the
group’s success. This strategy permits teachers to provide differentiated levels of scaffolding
and challenge to accommodate individual strengths and needs (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Cubing. Cubing is a differentiated, instructional strategy that encourages the study of concepts
from at least six different vantage points, based on children’s readiness, interests, and learning
preferences. Students roll a cube and complete the task that is revealed. Teachers often include
a number of activity options on each side of the cube (Edugains, 2016b).

Cues (Prompts). Cues are typically represented by signals, hints, or step-by-step scaffolds.
These prompts are used to support teaching and guide learners through various educational
tasks (verbal, visual, physical) (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Cultural Sensitivity. Cultural sensitivity is an awareness of, respect for, and appreciation of the
many factors that impact values, priorities, and perspectives of individuals, families, and
communities. Multicultural principles must be infused into culturally and linguistically diverse
classrooms in order to meet the needs of the student population. This approach aligns with the
constructivist view of teaching and learning. To build inclusive educational environments,
teachers must help students to construct knowledge, build on their personal and cultural
strengths, and examine the curriculum from many angles (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017; NCCRES,
2004).
Curriculum Compacting. Curriculum compacting is a differentiated strategy that targets

“talented” students of any grade or age; high achievers are able to skip through “easy” material
and tackle increasingly more complex (interesting) content. The compacting method uses
responsive, streamlined approaches to student differences, content, process, and products
(Heacox & Strickland, 2012). Teachers should follow three steps: (1) Name It: Identify
compacting areas, where learners excel or display pronounced interest and ability; (2) Prove It:
Pre-assess students on the intended outcomes to determine mastery levels; if a score of 85% is
attained, the material need not be reviewed; and (3) Change It: Assign alternate, investigative
activities for the student to complete (Reis & Renzulli, 1992).

Debate Team Carousel. The debate team carousel strategy is an excellent tool for organizing
structured classroom discussions. It can be used to assess students’ critical thinking skills and to
present, study, synthesize, or “wrap up” curriculum-based topics and concepts. This approach
facilitates the exploration of multi-dimensional issues, for children of all ages. The teacher starts
by posing a “yes-no” question to elicit multiple responses. Students then articulate their
personal opinions and supporting reasons. It is expected that a range of divergent responses
will be generated and lead to lively debates (Himmele & Himmele, 2015).

Descriptive Feedback. Descriptive feedback is a strategy that is used to provide students with
information about their learning (assessment). This type of feedback helps to bridge the gap
between individuals’ current competencies and the designated learning targets; teachers share
specific details about what is going well, areas for improvement, and the steps needed to move
forward. The main goals are to increase students’ self-monitoring skills and help them achieve
optimal performance levels (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).

Direct (Explicit) Instruction. Direct, explicit instruction is intended as a framework for
developing essential skills and strategies that can be transferred to other learning situations
(without teacher support). It involves a precise pedagogical approach that uses sequenced tasks
to teach skills directly and efficiently. The key features of explicit instruction include modelling
and demonstration, think-alouds, definitions, guided practice, self-regulation, and a gradual
release of responsibility (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983).


Echo Reading. Echo reading is an effective reading-enhancement strategy, that is conducted in

pairs. One partner reads a sentence, phrase, or word and the other repeats it, while carefully
tracking the words on the page. Echo reading helps to boost confidence, listening and fluency
skills, and vocabulary development (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Equity. Equity is related to inclusive and respectful treatment of all people. This means that
schools must work to eliminate barriers and provide appropriate supports that enable students
to participate fully in all areas of school life (“leveling the playing field”) (Manitoba Education &
Youth, 1996).

Essential Questions. Essential questions represent a powerful strategy for driving student
learning; they tend to be open-ended in nature and focus on the core concepts of lessons or
units. Essential questions are designed to encourage students to think deeply, transfer learning,
and connect ideas to experiences and other curricular topics. They also serve as a springboard
for further exploration through discussion, debate, and extension activities (McTighe & Wiggins,
2013).

Evaluation. Evaluation refers to a process of judging the quality of students’ achievement or
progress (based on a set of predetermined criteria) and calculating a grade to represent that
quality. Data are typically collected, at the end of term, using various “assessments of learning”
instruments, across all subject areas and grades (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2010).

Executive Functioning. Executive functioning entails the “management of cognitive processes”
(i.e., memory skills, task flexibility, logic, higher-order thinking, problem-solving, etc.). These
processes need to be operating optimally in order to effectively plan, coordinate, control, and
execute self-regulated actions and behaviours (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).
Exemplars. Exemplars are samples of completed assignments that provide concrete

representations of an exceptional final product. Exemplars may be created by teachers or
feature high-quality student work. Non-examples, that do not meet project criteria, may also be
used as teaching tools; students learn to carefully review rubrics, success criteria, or project
checklists (Enome, Inc., 2021).
Exit Slips. Exit slips are used as a quick, flexible assessment technique that give teachers up-to-
date information about learners’ skill levels and conceptual understanding. Students respond to
a teacher-created question at the end of class. Here, they reflect on and verbalize their learning
(i.e., reading, writing, content, etc.). These informal assessment tools provide clues about
students’ grasp of new concepts, persistent misconceptions, and gaps in learning. Elements that
need to be revisited and retaught are revealed (Calkins, 1991).

Expert Learners. Expert learners are strategic, self-directed, and reflective; they take charge of
their learning and course-correct when necessary (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).


Expository Text Structure Strategy. The expository text structure strategy reinforces the idea
that “considerate” texts organize information in a clearly defined hierarchical structure. There
are five text structures that are popular amongst non-fiction writers. These include: (1)
description, (2) sequence, (3) cause & effect, (4) compare & contrast, and (5) problem &
solution (McGee, 1982). Once students are fully familiar with these predictable structures,
comprehension, writing, and information-retrieval skills tend to improve (Armbruster,
Andersen, & Ostertag, 1989).

Expository Texts. Expository (informational) texts are non-fiction print materials, which
contain factual, conceptual, and technical information. Often, these texts involve unfamiliar
content, a heavy concept load, complex syntax, and a hierarchical pattern of main ideas (Calfee &
Curley, 1984).

Fist-of-Five. This assessment technique allows teachers to quickly gauge student
understanding. After presenting a lesson, teachers ask the class to use a hand to signal their
depth of understanding [A fist means I don’t understand anything; 1 finger means I need help; 2
fingers mean I need practice; 3 fingers mean I understand fairly well; 4 fingers mean I mostly
understand; 5 fingers mean I completely understand] (NL Department of Education, n.d.).

Flexible Groupings. In a differentiated classroom, students are grouped and regrouped
(frequently and flexibly), based on their interest in a given topic or readiness to learn (Edugains,
2016b).

Flipped Classroom. Flipped classrooms reverse the traditional teaching method where
educators provide direct instruction first and students practise independently afterwards. The
flipped classroom approach begins with assigning new academic material (homework), before
lessons unfold. Thus, class time is devoted to digging deeper into the subject matter and
applying new knowledge, through differentiated, interactive enrichment or reinforcement
activities. When learners access content ahead of time, they can prepare for class at their own
pace (Enome, Inc., 2021).
Frayer Model. This instructional model is designed to help students internalize key words and
concepts. It is a graphic organizer that consists of a four-cell box. The teacher writes the target
concept or vocabulary in the centre of the page. Students are then asked to add a definition
(upper-left corner); facts/characteristics (upper-right corner); examples (lower-left corner),
and “non-examples” of the word or concept (lower-right corner). These work products
(diagrams) are shared in small groups or with the whole class (Enome, Inc., 2021).
Generalization (Transfer). Generalization is the ability to transfer previously learned

knowledge and skills, acquired in one situation, and then effectively apply that information to a
different context or set of circumstances (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).


Gist Statements. A “gist” statement is a comprehension strategy where learners express the
main idea in a summary statement of 20 words or less. Students work independently or in pairs.
They must respond to the five W's and one H (who, what, when, where, why, how). Information
is condensed and redundant details are eliminated (Cunningham & Moore, 1986).

Goal Setting & Reflection. Goal setting is a process in which teachers work with students to
determine appropriate academic, social, and behavioural goals. Once the goals have been
outlined, the teacher and student work together to identify a feasible, step-by-step plan and
timeline. Students use self-monitoring strategies and checklists to track progress and reflect on
their own learning (Enome, Inc., 2021).

Gradual Release of Responsibility (Fading). Gradual release of responsibility is a concept
used to denote the process by which students engage in activities that support their learning
and then gradually take over the process of becoming independent learners (Pearson &
Gallagher, 1983). In other words, teachers gradually reduce the use of cues and prompts until a
skill is mastered [“I do it, we do it, you do it.”] (Brownlie & Schnellert, 2009; Fisher & Frey,
2007).

Graffiti Wall/Board. The graffiti wall is a cooperative strategy that may be used as a pre-
assessment or post-instructional task. It helps learners to brainstorm, share background
knowledge, and demonstrate problem-solving skills (related to a given subject). Teachers
introduce the topic and give everyone a sticky note. Students write or draw a picture to
represent what they know (or ask a question) and place their contribution on the graffiti wall.
All of the information is then shared orally in class (Gregory & Chapman, 2007).

Graphic Organizers/Concept Maps. A graphic organizer is a visual tool used by learners to
construct meaning about a particular subject; it also serves as a vehicle for connecting new
information to students’ prior knowledge. This visual representation depicts important textual
elements (i.e., central purpose, main ideas, supporting details, text structure) and makes
thinking visible (Lipson & Wixon, 1991).

Inclusion. Inclusion is a philosophy and belief system that embraces the notion of providing
people with appropriate supports to facilitate access and meaningful participation within the
learning community; the goal is to meet the needs of all individuals and to ensure that they feel
safe, valued, and accepted (Manitoba Education & Advanced Learning, 2015).

Independent Projects. Independent projects are co-developed by teachers and students. The
aim is to provide opportunities for learners to apply skills and knowledge in order to “solve” a
problem or conduct an in-depth investigation of a high-interest topic. Planning should include
the following steps: (1) choose subjects that are motivating; (2) brainstorm potential questions;
(3) determine a timeline; (4) uncover reliable sources of information; (5) share results with
others; and (6) evaluate the process and product, as well as time-management skills (Alberta
Learning, 2002; Gregory & Chapman, 2007).


Jigsaws. Jigsaws are cooperative learning strategies in which teachers assign each student to a
"home" group. The objective is for learners to become “topic experts;” key terms and main ideas
are identified and synthesized. Once mastery is achieved, one member of each group rotates into
a new group and shares personal insights about the subject under study. Throughout the
process, students are honing their comprehension, thinking, communication, and collaborative
skills. Individual students act as pieces of the topic's puzzle; when they work together as a
cohesive whole, they generate a complete “jigsaw puzzle” (Aronson, 2021).

Journals. The journal strategy is an effective way for students to put “pen to paper” and freely
express personal thoughts, feelings, and ideas. Journals may take on many forms: photo
scrapbooks, comics & illustrations, content-area topics, diaries (typed), or reflections (Chapman
& King, 2009).

KWL Charts. A KWL chart is a visual representation of what students already know (K), what
students will learn (W) , and what students have learned (L). Teachers frequently use KWLs to
introduce a topic or pre-assess children’s prior knowledge (whole class or individually). These
versatile, 3-column charts can also capture the before, during, and after stages of skill-building
activities or interventions, across a range of curricular areas (Gregory & Chapman, 2007).

Learning Contracts. Learning contracts provide an effective means for teachers and students to
negotiate differentiated task-completion agreements. These agreements are written in student-
friendly, easy-to-understand language and contain a few common elements: (1) the prescribed
learning goals, (2) success [assessment] criteria, (3) formatting rules, (4) checkpoints for
monitoring progress, and (5) a submission date (Edugains, 2016b).

Learning Logs. Learning logs fulfill multiple purposes in a busy classroom. They are useful tools
to guide instructional practice and to track students’ thinking, understanding, performance, and
even “emotional” health. Writing prompts can be adjusted to suit diverse classroom contexts,
varying curricular demands, and specific student characteristics. Topic choices are virtually
limitless. Student response expectations can also be differentiated to accommodate various
learning modalities (McCrindle & Christensen, 1995).

Learning Menus. Learning menus are useful tools for constructing flexible, differentiated
lessons and instructional approaches; teachers are able to create menus that provide students
with ample choice, scaffolding, and challenge. It is recommended that the following steps are
followed: (1) identify the essential understandings; (2) create a universal entry point for ALL;
and (3) ensure that a range of tiered activities are available, targeting both the struggling and
advanced learners in the class (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Literature Circles. Literature circles can be readily differentiated to support a range of literacy
development goals and student needs; collaboration is considered the nucleus of this flexible
instructional strategy. Teachers are able to structure literature-circle tasks in a way that
facilitates engagement, sense-making, critical thinking, creativity, discussion, as well as reading
and writing development (Noe & Johnson, 1999).


Low-Floor High-Ceiling Tasks [LFHC]. The LFHC math strategy focuses on accessibility and
complexity. Thus, all students can participate meaningfully and receive just enough challenge
and support to make discernable gains. Learners are encouraged to work at their own pace and
contribute to the “rich mathematical discussions” that take place in class (Jo Boaler, Stanford
University). To ensure maximum benefit, it is recommended that children work slightly beyond
their comfort zones (ZPD) (Byrdseed, 2009; Utah State Board of Education & Hanover Research,
2019).

Metacognition. Metacognition refers to knowledge concerning one’s own cognitive processes
and products (“thinking about one’s own thinking”). The goal is for students to be consciously
aware of and exert deliberate control over the strategies they use to improve learning (Garner,
1994).

Metacognitive Note Taking. Metacognitive note taking is a strategy that helps students to
actively engage in their reading and monitor their comprehension. Margin notes, underlining,
and sticky notes are often used to aid concentration and improve meaning-making (Harvey &
Goudvis, 2007).

Mind Maps (Webs). Mind mapping is an effective learning strategy that fuses students’
creativity and reasoning skills together. Strategic use of mind maps helps students to capture
lots of information on a single page. Students are also able to present a coherent, interrelated
representation of their ideas, using carefully selected vocabulary, colours, pictures, and text
(Buzan & Harrison, 2018).

Mini Lessons for Writing. Mini lessons are an integral part of the writing process. During these
strategic, 5- to 30-minute lessons, teachers provide demonstrations, guided practice, exemplars,
and checklists that zero in on recurring trouble spots or gaps in knowledge (tied to the writing
task and to student needs) (Enome, Inc., 2021).

Mnemonic Devices. Mnemonics are evidence-based, memory-enhancing techniques that can
help students recall facts and see relationships between concepts and ideas. Students use
acronyms or acrostics to improve information retrieval (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).
Modifications. Modifications represent changes to curricular content and/or grade-level

outcomes. Teachers may choose to reduce the complexity and/or number of regular-program
expectations to fully address students’ unique learning needs (Manitoba Education & Youth,
1996).
Multiple Intelligences. The notion of multiple intelligences refers to a theory developed by

Howard Gardner; the theory describes eight intelligence areas, in which individuals exhibit
varying degrees of proficiency or aptitude (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).


Orbitals. Orbital studies are extension activities that students pursue independently, over a
period of 3 to 6 weeks. These investigations are highly flexible but tend to “orbit” or revolve
around a particular area of the “regular” curriculum. Topics are co-created by teachers and
students; project goals and assessment criteria are also negotiated (Tomlinson, 2004).

Paragraph Templates. Paragraph templates are helpful graphic organizers that learners use to
pinpoint and sequence the basic elements of a paragraph (i.e., topic sentence, supporting details,
conclusion). The “hamburger” chart is a popular choice: top bun (introduction); key facts
(middle - meat, lettuce, tomato), and bottom bun (conclusion) (Enome, Inc., 2021).

Pre-K Journals. Pre-K journals are useful tools for enhancing early literacy skills (i.e., scribbling,
letter formation, etc.) and for gathering ongoing evidence of students’ progress. Teachers start
with demonstrations, modelling, and think alouds. These lessons can include drawing pictures,
writing letters and words, copying sight words from the board, and composing sentences. Later,
students practise recording their ideas and creating illustrations in their personal workbooks
(Enome, Inc., 2021).

Problem-Based Learning [PBL]. Problem-based learning [PBL] is a student-centred
educational approach that is closely monitored by the teacher. Children are free to explore
complex topics of personal interest and grapple with “real-world” problems. PBL activities are
designed to help students take responsibility for their own learning, develop research capacity,
and acquire transferable knowledge, higher-order thinking skills, and content-specific
understandings (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Question-Answer Relationship [QAR]. The QAR strategy is a four-part framework that targets
comprehension and test-taking skills; students learn to accurately identify and respond to
different kinds of questions. Teachers begin the planning process by selecting appropriate
(non)fiction texts and developing right there; think & search; author & you; and on your own
questions. For “right there” questions, answers are in the text. For “think & search” questions,
the answers are found in different sections of the text. For “in my head” questions, the answers
are not immediately apparent; students must use text information and their reasoning skills to
create a response. For “on your own” questions, students do not need the text to develop
reasonable answers. Once the QAR exercise is concluded, teachers should encourage the
children to share their experiences (Raphael & Au, 2005).

RAFTs. RAFTs [Role, Audience, Format, Topic] is a writing strategy that encourages students to
write creatively, to consider a topic from many perspectives, and to practise writing for different
audiences. This flexible strategy can be differentiated to match student’s readiness, interests,
and learning preferences. Teachers might have students: (1) do mind maps or exit slips, to
demonstrate prior knowledge or mastery; (2) divide into small groups and produce a graffiti
wall that includes concepts under study; or (3) solve an intricate math problem (Edugains,
2016b).


Rainbow Retellings. Rainbow retellings are a valuable tool to improve reading comprehension
and sequential recall of a text. Learners use the colours (and sentence stems) as visual aids
(charts, laminated handouts, manipulatives) to summarize the most important details in a
coherent way. Teacher prompts might include: (1) Red: Ready to hear a retelling? “The
characters in the story are…,” (2) Orange: On to where this story took place…, (3) Yellow: You
have to hear the problem in the story…, (4) Green: Get ready for a few more details…, (5) Blue:
Better start bringing it to a close by telling how the problem was solved…, and (6) Purple:
Picking the best part. “It was when….” Mastery of these skills is highly transferable (Enome Inc.,
2021).

RAP. RAP is a simple-to-execute comprehension strategy. The acronym means: (1) read a text
selection, (2) ask yourself to identify the main idea and two supporting details, and (3) put the
information into your own words (paraphrase) (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Reader’s Theatre. Reader’s theatre is an instructional strategy that helps to improve fluency
and comprehension. To prepare for “theatre” performances, learners read and reread various
sections of the assigned print material. Students continue to practise their scripts as intonation,
facial expressions, and gestures are added to “bring the text to life.” Memorization, sets, and
props are unnecessary (Enome Inc., 2021; Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Respectful Tasks. Respectful tasks increase students’ risk-taking behaviours and self-
confidence. Tasks are respectful when learners (who struggle) are offered grade-level activities
(“at the edge of their current readiness”). These educational tasks must include the same
learning goals and be just as engaging as those designed for “typically developing” students (not
“busy work”) (Edugains, 2016b).

Response Cards. Response cards help to encourage greater student participation when
answering teachers’ questions. Educators may choose to provide blank cards (students write
their own answers), or use pre-made cards (i.e., true-false, yes-no, A, B, C, D). Students then
share their thoughts and impressions with their classmates; responses are monitored closely to
ensure comprehension (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Scaffolding. Scaffolding involves instructional supports or strategies that provide adjustable
and temporary assistance to students as they attempt to complete “regular education” tasks and
activities. Effective scaffolds align with students’ idiosyncratic differences, specific learning
goals, and grade-level performance standards (Applebee, 1991; EL Education, 2021d).

Schemata. Schemata and schema are technical terms employed by cognitive scientists to
explain how people organize and store information in their brains. Schemata have been
described as “the building blocks of cognition” (Rumelhart, 1982). Schema activation is the
mechanism by which individuals access background knowledge and align it with new
information contained in a text. In doing so, they are able to build on the meaning they already
bring to a reading act.


Seasonal Partners. The seasonal partners strategy helps students exchange ideas and discover
new insights about their learning. In differentiated classrooms, it is customary to provide
students with opportunities to discuss, contemplate, and share their thoughts; this leads to
better information processing and retention. Once seasonal partners are assigned, students
meet in their groups following a lesson, experiment, or reading; respond to teachers’ prompts or
questions; and then compare notes (Preszler, 2006).

Self-Monitoring. Self-monitoring strategies are individualized plans used to increase students’
positive, independent functioning across various school-related domains (i.e., academic, social,
self-control, etc.). The focus shifts away from the negative, unproductive actions and moves to
acknowledging students’ “good” choice-making and behaviours. Target goals are set (checklist),
behaviours are tracked, and progress is assessed to determine next steps. It is expected that the
child’s self-regulatory skills become increasingly more acute over time (Learn Alberta, 2008b).

Sketch-to-Stretch. Sketch to stretch is a “guided comprehension” strategy where students
“draw” main ideas and details, from a selected print source, in order to demonstrate knowledge
and understanding. The teacher stops at an important point in the text (after reading aloud or a
period of silent, independent reading). Learners are then asked to sketch their response (i.e.,
symbolic image of a character or “problem” in a story or expository text). Afterwards, drawings
are shared, and connections are explained. This strategy promotes active engagement in the
reading process and stimulates debate and discussion amongst class participants (McLaughlin,
2003).

Socratic Questioning. Socratic questioning is an effective method that logically and
sequentially guides students to higher-level thinking, through a series of finely-tuned,
predetermined steps (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Sticky Notes. Learners use the sticky-note strategy to record main ideas, underscore points of
confusion in a text, and highlight links to previously learned material. Metacognitive skills are at
work during this process. Once the ideas are recorded, students can reflect on their final
product and reorganize the pieces of paper into a coherent, graphic representation of their
thinking processes (Enome, Inc., 2021).

Story Maps. Story maps are graphic organizers that help learners identify and organize story
elements (i.e., characters, setting, problem/conflict, solution). These maps can be utilized to
support pre-writing and post-reading activities (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Strategy Groups. Strategy groups are frequently used in differentiated classrooms. Direct,
targeted instruction can be provided to small groups of students, who require additional skill-
building practice in a particular curricular area. It is customary for children to move in and out
of these groups as their needs change over time. Teachers collect informal, observational data to
guide their decision-making when programming adjustments are necessary (Enome, Inc., 2021).


Student Profiles. Student profiles are excellent planning tools. They help teachers to compile
valuable, detailed information about individual learners and the specific instructional-
assessment strategies that harmonize best with the student’s identified strengths and needs,
learning style, inclinations, interests, and readiness levels (Manitoba Education & Youth,
1996).

Sustained Silent Reading [SSR]. When students engage in SSR, they freely choose their own
print materials to read silently. These regularly scheduled SSR periods aid vocabulary
acquisition and reading fluency (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).

Student-Centred Teachers. Student-centered teachers visibly promote affirmation,
unconditional respect, high expectations, and positive regard for all members of the school
community; they believe that everybody has the capacity to learn (even those who struggle)
(Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015).

T-Charts. T-charts serve a dual purpose. These two-column graphic organizers allow students
to: (1) organize and dissect information in ways that are more readily understood and
consolidated, and (2) record main ideas and supporting details from fiction and nonfiction
sources. T-charts are highly adaptable to the needs of diverse students in inclusive classrooms
(Enome, Inc., 2021).

Thematic Teaching. Thematic teaching is a practical method for integrating and linking
multiple curricular elements. This approach tends to make learning more meaningful because it
allows students to see how separate “parts” connect to the “big idea.” Children have an
opportunity to examine many different aspects of a topic or subject area (Gargiulo & Metcalf,
2017).

The Six Facets of Understanding. This planning strategy helps teachers to design effective
educational activities and lessons, aimed at assessing student understanding. This tool allows
educators to construct reliable assessment tasks that target six key areas: explanation,
interpretation, application, perspective, empathy, and self-knowledge. All of these tasks provide
clues about students’ grasp of the topic under study (McTighe & Wiggins, 2014).

Think-Alouds. A think-aloud refers to a technique in which teachers explicitly model
procedures or steps. In other words, they verbalize their internal thinking processes (Gargiulo &
Metcalf, 2017).

Think-Pair-Share. Think-Pair-Share is a collaborative strategy that asks learners to respond
individually and then share their ideas about a teacher-created question or problem. This
approach enables students to consider multiple viewpoints and develop a shared understanding
of a topic. it also helps to lessen public-speaking barriers because everyone has ample time to
prepare answers (Enome, Inc., 2021).


Three-Before-Me. Children’s ability to problem-solve independently is a vital element in their

development. The Three-Before-Me strategy directs students to seek information from three
sources (to get “unstuck”) before consulting the teacher (i.e., word wall, whiteboard, buddies,
reminder posters, strategy charts, computer, thinking about it; looking around, dictionary, etc.).
They are empowered to wrestle with challenges on their own; this builds resilience and
confidence (NL Department of Education, n.d.).

Tic-Tac-Toe. The Tic-Tac-Toe [Think-Tac-Toe] strategy is a versatile differentiation tool that
provides learners with a great deal of choice and accessibility. All tasks align with children’s
readiness, interests, and learning profiles and can be easily adapted to include appropriate
levels of scaffolding and challenge. The teacher-created activities are outlined on a nine-square
grid and distributed to the class; these activities reinforce content, process, and product goals.
Three adjacent or diagonal exercises (“three-in-a-row”) must be completed by each child. The
tic-tac-toe strategy can be used for practice, skill building, and assessment purposes
(Tomlinson, 2003; Wormeli, 2018).

Tiering. Tiering is introduced into classroom practice to respond to students’ varying degrees
of readiness. Teachers create three versions of grade-level assignments to ensure access for
ALL. It is worth noting that activities must be “respectful” (interesting, challenging, appropriate,
engaging) (Edugains, 2016b).

Venn Diagrams. Venn diagrams are used to compare & contrast information about two or more
objects, concepts, or ideas. They assist students to organize data and discern valid connections
between elements. Venn diagrams can be used after reading a text, listening to an invited guest,
or viewing a video (Alberta Learning, 2002).

Voice & Choice. To promote student agency, inclusive-minded teachers incorporate voice and
choice into their differentiated classrooms. This means that individuals take on the
responsibility for their own learning; they are offered opportunities to select and manage
projects of interest (with teacher approval) (Edutopia, 2016).
Word Maps. Word maps are graphic organizers that aid learners in analyzing and
understanding how various terms are used (in definitions, synonyms, antonyms, mnemonics).
Students create “memory sentences” and “mind pictures” to internalize new material (Gargiulo
& Metcalf, 2017).

Zone of Proximal Development [ZPD]. Teachers can help students reach their full potential by
assigning tasks that are within their ZPD. The ZPD refers to the capacity for learning; it is the
distance between what students can do without assistance and what they can do with assistance
(“at the edge of challenge”). The basis of proficient teaching, then, is two-fold: (1) knowledge of
students’ readiness for instruction and (2) selection of the best progressive steps to take.
Readiness stages follow no strict sequence and vary across subject areas. Relative to teaching
and learning, one of the key goals of the ZPD is to facilitate “performance before competence”
(Cazden, 1981; Newman & Holzman, 1993; Tomlinson & Murphy, 2015).


Final Thoughts on Implementing Differentiated Instructional Practices

Teaching is not a one-way street . . . . Students are our partners in education . . . . No one should
expect to know how to differentiate instruction and assessment for all students every day. We will
get closer to the ideal when we realize that good solutions often come from the collective wisdom
of both teachers and students. – Rick Wormeli, 2007

Excellence in education is when we do everything that we can to make sure that students become
everything they can. – Carol Ann Tomlinson

Section 5: References

Access Project & Colorado State University. (n.d.). From theory to practice. UDL quick tips.
Retrieved from http://accessproject.colostate.edu/udl/documents/udl_quick_tips.pdf

Alberta Education. (2008). Supporting positive behaviour in Alberta schools: An intensive
individualized approach. Edmonton, AB: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/fc1f4998-f28f-4718-951a-1918f2f6191c/resource/bbe115b0-
e9e8-4853-a440-86bb8ba9b8db/download/supporting-positive-behaviour-individual.pdf

Alberta Education, (2010). Making a difference: Meeting diverse learning needs with
differentiated instruction. Edmonton, AB: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/e02db4bb-ba84-4ee2-92eb-
cd7e20fee97c/resource/4f325cbc-0b11-4284-80fb-
6b83e3072b49/download/makingadifference-2010.pdf [Excellent Sample Strategies]

Alberta Learning. (2002). Health and life skills guide to implementation: K-9: Assess, evaluate and
communicate student learning. Retrieved from
https://education.alberta.ca/media/482292/aecsl.pdf

Andersen, T. H., & Armbruster, B. B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In R. C. Anderson, J. Osborn,
& R. J. Tierney (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools: Basal readers and content texts (pp.
193-226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Anderson & Krathwohl, A. (2001). Bloom’s taxonomy: Revised. University of Waterloo, Centre for
Teaching Excellence. Retrieved from https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-
excellence/teaching-resources/teaching-tips/planning-courses-and-assignments/course-
design/blooms-taxonomy

Applebee, A. N. (1991). Environments for language teaching and learning: Contemporary issues
and future directions. In J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J. R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook of research
on teaching the English language arts (pp. 549-558). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Armbruster, B. B., Andersen, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure to improve
reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 43(2), 130-137.

Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Center for
Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

Aronson, E. (2021). The jigsaw classroom: Jigsaw in 10 easy steps. Retrieved from
https://www.jigsaw.org/


Attwood, A. I., & Gerber, J. L. (2020). Comic books and graphic novels for the differentiated
humanities classroom, Kappa Delta Pi Record, 56(4), 176-182.
doi: 10.1080/00228958.2020.1813520

Bartlett, F. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, MA:
Cambridge University Press.

Bell, K., & Freeman, T. (n.d.). The sweet spot for learning: Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development
and instructional scaffolding. Retrieved from
https://www.coloradocollege.edu/offices/colketcenter/theory-into-
practice/Theory%20into%20Practice%2017-18%20Block%207.pdf

Best, J., & 3P Learning. (2020, June 23). A teacher’s guide to differentiated instruction. Retrieved
from https://www.3plearning.com/blog/differentiated-instruction/

Biklen, D., & Burke, J. (2006). Presuming competence. Equity & Excellence in Education, 39(2),
166–175. doi: 10.1080/10665680500540376

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.

Blackhurst, A. E. (2005). Perspectives on applications of technology in the field of learning
disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 175-178.

Bowen, R. S. (2017). Understanding by design. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching.
Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/understanding-by-design/

Buzan, T., & Harrison, J. (2018). Mind maps mastery: The complete guide to learning and using the
most powerful thinking tool in the universe. London, UK: Watkins Media Limited.

Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., & National Research Council (U.S.). (1999). How people
learn : Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

British Columbia [BC] Ministry of Education. (2017). UDL assessment. Retrieved from
http://udlresource.ca/2017/12/assessment/

Brownlie, F., & Schnellert, L. (2009). Chapter 1: It’s all about thinking: Collaborating to support
all learners in English, Social Studies, and Humanities. Winnipeg, MB: Portage & Main Press.
Retrieved from https://blogsomemoore.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/brownlie-schnellert-
2009-frameowrks.pdf

Byrdseed, I. (2009). To differentiate: High ceilings and low floors. Retrieved from
https://www.byrdseed.com/to-differentiate-lower-floors-and-raise-ceilings/


Calfee, R. C., & Curley, R. (1984). Structures of prose in content areas. In J. Flood (Ed.),
Understanding reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Candler, L. (n.d.). Teaching resources: Freebies. Retrieved from
https://www.lauracandler.com/ccc-bestfreebies/

Calkins, L. M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cazden, C. (1981). Performance before competence: Assistance to child discourse in the Zone of
Proximal Development. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition,
3(1), 5-8.

CEEDAR Center. (2016). What Is differentiated instruction (DI) self-assessment? Gainesville, FL:
University of Florida. Retrieved from http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/FIN-DI-Self-Assessment-Tool-ns.pdf [Teacher DI Self-Assessment]

Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines:
Version 2.0. Retrieved from https://blog.yorksj.ac.uk/moodle/2015/11/30/universal-design-
for-learning-udl/

Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2015). Top 10 UDL tips for assessment. Retrieved
from https://slds.osu.edu/posts/documents/top-10-udl-tips.pdf
Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2016). UDL tips for designing an engaging
learning environment. Retrieved from https://www.cast.org/publications/2016/udl-tips-
designing-engaging-learning-environment
Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2020a). UDL tips for assessment. Retrieved from
https://www.cast.org/publications/2020/udl-tips-assessments

Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2020b). UDL tips for designing learning
experiences. Retrieved from https://www.cast.org/publications/2020/udl-tips-designing-
learning-experiences

Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST]. (2021). About universal design for learning.
Retrieved from https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl

Centre for Innovation & Excellence in Learning. (2019). Assessment for, as, and of learning.
Thunder Bay, ON: Lakehead University. Retrieved from
https://teachingcommons.lakeheadu.ca/assessment-and-learning

Chapman, C., & King, R. (2005). Differentiated assessment strategies: One tool doesn’t fit all.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2005.


Chapman, C. M., & King, R. S. (2009). Differentiated instructional strategies for writing in the
content areas. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Cunningham, J. W., & Moore, D. W. (1986). The confused world of main idea. In J. F. Baumann
(Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension (pp. 1-17). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.

Dack, H., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2015). Inviting all students to learn: Cultural variations in the
classroom). Educational Leadership, 72(6), 10-15.
Daniels, H. (2017). Introduction to Vygotsky (3rd ed., Vol. 1). London, UK: Routledge.

De Jesus, O. N. (2012, Summer). Differentiated instruction: Can differentiated instruction
provide success for all learners? National Teacher Education Journal, 5(3), 7–10.

Doubet, K. J., & Hockett, J. A. (2017). Differentiation in the elementary grades: Strategies to
engage and equip all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum
Development [ASCD].

Dweck, C. S. (2010, September). Even geniuses work hard. Educational Leadership, 68(2), 16-20.

Eaton, E., & Saskatchewan Valley School Division. (1996). Differentiated instruction. Retrieved
from
https://www.readingrockets.org/sites/default/files/Differentiated%20Instruction_Eaton.pd
f [Differentiated Lesson Format]

Enome, Inc. (2021). Goalbook toolkit: UDL-aligned strategies. Retrieved from
https://goalbookapp.com/toolkit/v/strategies [Excellent Strategy Resource]

Edmonton Public Schools. (2013). Inclusive learning: Everyone’s in: Learning guide. Retrieved
from https://www.epsb.ca/media/epsb/ourdistrict/topicsofinterest/LearningGuide_2013.pdf

Edugains. (2016a). Differentiated instruction educator’s package: Overview. Retrieved from
http://www.edugains.ca/resourcesDI/EducatorsPackages/DIEducatorsPackage_2016/DI_Educ
ators_Introduction_AODA.pdf [List of Resources in Math, Geography, History, Canadian/World
Studies; Samples & Exemplars; Multiple Grade Levels]

Edugains. (2016b). Knowing and responding to learners: A differentiated instruction educator’s
guide. Retrieved from
http://www.edugains.ca/resourcesDI/EducatorsPackages/DIEducatorsPackage_2016/DI_Educ
atorsGuide_AODA.pdf

Edutopia. (2016, August 16). Personalized learning: Enabling student voice and choice through
projects. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/video/personalized-learning-enabling-
student-voice-and-choice-through-projects


EL Education. (2021a). Helping all learners: Differentiation. Retrieved from
https://eleducation.org/resources/helping-all-learners-differentiation

EL Education. (2021b). Helping all learners: Readiness. Retrieved from
https://eleducation.org/resources/helping-all-learners-readiness

EL Education. (2021c). Helping all learners: Learning profile. Retrieved from
https://eleducation.org/resources/helping-all-learners-learning-profile

EL Education. (2021d). Helping all learners: Scaffolding. Retrieved from
https://eleducation.org/resources/helping-all-learners-scaffolding

EL Education. (2021e). Helping all learners: Tiering. Retrieved from
https://eleducation.org/resources/helping-all-learners-tiering

Elliot, K., Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2019). Leading learning through a gradual release of
responsibility instructional framework. In M. McVee, E. Ortlieb, J. Reichenberg & P. D. Pearson.
(Eds.). Series: The gradual release of responsibility in literacy research and practice (pp. 91-102).
Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007). Implementing a schoolwide literacy framework: Improving
achievement in an urban elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 61(1), 32-43.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the
gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development [ASCD].

Fox, L., Dunlap, G., Hemmeter, M. L., Joseph, G., & Strain, P. (2003). The teaching pyramid: A
model for supporting social competence and preventing challenging behavior in young children.
Young Children, 58(4), 48–53.

Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2019). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for
classroom teachers (8th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Future Learn & National Stem Learning Centre. (n.d.). Course: Differentiation for learning: Lev
Vygotsky and the Zone of Proximal Development [ZPD]. Retrieved from
https://www.futurelearn.com/info/courses/differentiating-for-learning-stem/0/steps/15505

Gargiulo, R. M., & Metcalf, D. (2017). Teaching in today’s inclusive classrooms: A universal design
for learning approach (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.


Garner, R. (1994). Metacognition and executive control. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H.

Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 715-732). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.

Glass, K. T. (2009). Lesson design for differentiated instruction: Grades 4-9. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.

Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. M. (2012). Differentiated instructional strategies: One size doesn’t
fit all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Publishing Company [SAGE].

Gregory, G., & Kuzmich, L. (2014). Data driven differentiation in the standards-based classroom.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Publishing Company [SAGE].

Hall, T. E., Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2012). Chapter 1: An introduction to universal design for
learning: Questions and answers. Retrieved from
https://www.guilford.com/excerpts/hall3_ch1.pdf?t

Hall, T. E., Vue, G., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2004). Differentiated instruction and implications
for UDL. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from
https://www.cast.org/products-services/resources/2014/ncac-differentiated-instruction-udl

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for understanding
and engagement. Markham, ON: Stenhouse Publishers.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY:
Routledge.

Himmele, W., & Himmele, P. (2015). Total participation techniques: How to know what students
know. EL Educational Leadership. Retrieved from
https://pdo.ascd.org/LMSCourses/PD15OC007M/media/M2-TPTReading2.pdf

Holloway, J. H. (2000, September). Preparing teachers for differentiated instruction. Educational
Leadership, 58(1), 82-83.

Heacox, D., & Strickland, C. A. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to
reach and teach all learners. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing Inc.

Huebner, T. A. (2010). What research says about . . . differentiated learning, Educational
Leadership, 67(5), 79-81. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership-feb10/vol67/num05/Differentiated-Learning.aspx


Institutes on Academic Diversity. (2016). What is differentiated instruction. Charlotte, VA:

University of Virginia. Retrieved from http://differentiationcentral.com/what-is-differentiated-
instruction/ [Differentiation Model]

Kluth, P. (2013, April 3). Differentiating instruction: 10 no-fuss strategies for inclusive
classrooms. Education Canada Network. Retrieved from
https://www.edcan.ca/articles/differentiating-instruction/

Kluth, P. (2021). Readings: 20 ways to adapt the science lab. Retrieved from
https://www.paulakluth.com/readings/differentiating-instruction/20-ways-to-adapt-the-
science-lab/

Kurt, S. (2018, September 21). Teaching and learning: Backward design. Retrieved from
https://educationaltechnology.net/backward-design-understanding-by-design/

Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for standards-based
learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education, 32(3), 34-62.

Lazarus, S. S., Thurlow, M. L., Lali, K. E., & Christensen, L. (2009). Longitudinal analysis of state
accommodations policies: Twelve years of change, 1993-2005. Journal of Special Education,
43(2), 67-80.

Learn Alberta. (2002). Unlocking potential: Key components of programming for students with
learning disabilities. Edmonton, AB: Minister of Education. Retrieved from
https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/081131cd-a18b-4ae2-900d-
447818c5ca5a/resource/1f26966f-a649-4af3-94dd-2ba68dd09cb6/download/unlocking-
potential-programming-for-students-learning-disabilities-2002.pdf

Learn Alberta. (2008a). Assessment in mathematics. Edmonton, AB: Minister of Education.
Retrieved from https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/mewa/html/assessment/index.html

Learn Alberta. (2008b). Assessment strategies and tools. Edmonton, AB: Minister of Education.
Retrieved from https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/mewa/html/assessment/strategies.html

Learn Alberta. (2010). Making a difference: Meeting diverse learning needs with differentiated
instruction. Edmonton, AB: Minister of Education. Retrieved from
https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/e02db4bb-ba84-4ee2-92eb-
cd7e20fee97c/resource/4f325cbc-0b11-4284-80fb-
6b83e3072b49/download/makingadifference-2010.pdf

Learn Alberta, (2013). Inclusive education library: Instructional supports and strategies: Sample
strategies and supports for language arts and mathematics. Edmonton, AB: Minister of Education.
Retrieved from https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/ieptlibrary/lib08.html


Lingo, A. S., Barton-Arwood, S. M., & Jolivette, K. (2011). Teachers working together. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 43(3), 6-13.

Lipson, M. Y., & Wixon, K. K. (1991). Assessment and instruction of reading disability: An
interactive approach. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.

Lombardi, P. (2019). Instructional methods, strategies and technologies to meet the needs of all
learners: Chapter 12. Retrieved from
https://granite.pressbooks.pub/teachingdiverselearners/front-matter/introduction/

Manitoba Education & Advanced Learning. (2015). Supporting inclusive schools: Addressing the
needs of students with learning disabilities. Winnipeg, MB: Author.

Manitoba Education & Training. (2015). Addressing the needs of students with learning
disabilities. Retrieved from
https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/learn_disabilities/index.html

Manitoba Education & Youth. (1996). Success for all learners: A handbook on differentiating
instruction: A resource for kindergarten to senior 4 schools. Winnipeg, MB: Author.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-
based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Marzano, R, J., & Waters, T. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

McCarthy, J. (2015, August 28). 3 ways to plan for diverse learners: What teachers do. Retrieved
from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/differentiated-instruction-ways-to-plan-john-mccarthy

McCrindle, A. R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive
and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5(2), 167-185.

McGee, L. M. (1982). Awareness of text structure: Effects on children’s recall of expository text.
Reading Research Quarterly, 17(4), 581-590.

McLaughlin, M. (2003). Guided comprehension in the primary grades. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-quality
units. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].
Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_WhitePaper0312.pdf


McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2013). Essential questions: Opening doors to student understanding.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2014). Improving curriculum, assessment, and instruction using the
understanding by design framework. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development [ASCD]. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/ASCD_UBD_whitepaper.pdf

McTighe, J., & Willis, J. (2019). Upgrade your teaching: Understanding by design meets
neuroscience. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems [NCCRES]. (2004). Practitioners’
brief series: Becoming culturally responsive educators: Rethinking teacher education pedagogy.
Denver, CO: Author.

Nelson, L. L. & Basham, J. D. (2014). A blueprint for UDL: Considering the design of
implementation. Lawrence, KS: UDL-IRN. Retrieved from https://udl-irn.org

Newfoundland & Labrador Department of Education. (n.d.). Differentiated instruction in the
inclusive classroom: 65 strategies for success. St. John’s, NL: Author.

Newman, F., & Holzman, L. (1993). Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary scientist. New York, NY:
Routledge.

New South Wales [NSW] Education Standards Authority. (2021a). Differentiated assessment.
Retrieved from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-
the-curriculum/assessment/differentiated-assessment

New South Wales Education [NSW] Standards Authority. (2021b). Differentiated assessment:
Advice on assessment. Retrieved from
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/wcm/connect/77bf10ac-aa30-4904-b65b-
834ea4acb42f/advice_on_assessment_guide_web.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=

New South Wales [NSW] Education Standards Authority. (2021c). Differentiated assessment:
Assessment for, as and of learning. Retrieved from
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-
curriculum/assessment/approaches

New South Wales [NSW] Education Standards Authority. (2021d). Differentiated assessment:
Assessment principles. Retrieved from
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-
curriculum/assessment/assessment-principles


New South Wales Education [NSW] Standards Authority. (2021e). Differentiated assessment:
Effective feedback. Retrieved from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-
10/understanding-the-curriculum/assessment/effective-feedback

New South Wales Education [NSW] Standards Authority. (2021f). Differentiated assessment:
Sample work. Retrieved from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-
10/resources/sample-work

Noe, K., & Johnson, N. (1999). Getting started with literature circles. Norwood, MA: Christopher-
Gordon Publishers.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). Growing success: Assessment, evaluation, and reporting in
Ontario schools. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/GrowSuccess.pdf
[Grades 1-12]

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2013). Learning for all: A guide to effective assessment and
instruction for all students: Kindergarten to grade 12. Retrieved from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/LearningforAll2013.pdf

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2016). Adolescent literacy guide (2nd ed.). Retrieved from
http://thelearningexchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Knowing-and-Responding-to-
Learners-in-HGandCWS.pdf

Ontario Ministry of Education, Literacy & Numeracy Secretariat. (2008). Capacity building
series: Differentiating mathematics instruction Retrieved from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/different_math.pdf

Ontario Ministry of Education, Literacy & Numeracy Secretariat. (2011, July). Asking effective
questions: Special edition #21. Capacity building series. Retrieved from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/capacityBuilding.html

Ontario Ministry of Education, Student Success Implementation Branch. (2015). Knowing and
responding to learners in history, geography and Canadian and world studies [Brochure]. Retrieved
from http://thelearningexchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Knowing-and-Responding-to-
Learners-in-HGandCWS.pdf [DI for High School]

Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and
comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3233567

Parsons, S. A., Dodman, S. L., & Burrowbridge, S. C. (2013, September). Broadening the view of
differentiated instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 38-42. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Seth_Parsons2/publication/267099116_Broadening_the

_View_of_Differentiated_Instruction/links/5445e0d10cf2f14fb80f074b/Broadening-the-View-
of-Differentiated-Instruction.pdf

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension.
Contemporary Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11-17.

Piccolo, J. A. (1987). Expository text structure: Teaching and learning strategies. The Reading
Teacher, 40(9), 838-847.

Poel, E. W. (2007). Enhancing what students can do. EL Educational Leadership, 64(5), 64-66.
Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/feb07/vol64/num05/Enhancing-What-Students-Can-Do.aspx

Prawat, R. S., & Floden, R. E. (1994). Philosophical perspectives on constructivist views of
learning. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 37-48.

Pressley, M., & Woloshyn, V. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves children’s
academic performance. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Preszler, J. (2006). On target: Strategies that differentiate instruction: Grades K-4. Rapid City, SD:
South Dakota Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www.literacyleader.com/sites/default/files/StrategiesThatDifferentiateInstructionK_4-
080808.pdf

Raphael, T. E., & Au, K. H. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades
and content areas. The Reading Teacher, 59(3), 206-221.

Reeves, D. B. (2011). From differentiated instruction to differentiated assessment. ASCD Express,
6(20), Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol6/620-reeves.aspx

Reid, R., & Lienemann, T. L. (2006). Strategy instruction for students with learning disabilities.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. Using curriculum compacting to challenge the above-average. EL
Educational Leadership, 50(2), 51-57. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/oct92/vol50/num02/Using_Curric
ulum_Compacting_To_Challenge_the_Above-Average.aspx

Robb, L. (2020). What is differentiated instruction. Scholastic Teacher Resources. Retrieved from
https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/what-differentiated-
instruction/


Rose, D. H., Gravel, J. W., & Domings, Y. M. (2012). UDL unplugged: The role of technology in
UDL. In T. E. Hall, A. Meyer, & D. H. Rose (Eds.), Universal design for learning in the classroom:
Practical applications (pp. 120-134). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for
learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., & Gordon, D. (2014) Universal design for learning: Theory and practice.
Wakefield, MA: CAST.

Rumelhart, D. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.

Rumelhart, D. E. (1982). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In J. Guthrie (Ed.),
Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 3-26). Newark, NJ: International Reading
Association.

Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. E. & Bolt, S. (2015). Assessment in special and inclusive education (11th ed.).
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Schmidt, C. R., & Paris, S. G. (1983). The development of children’s verbal communicative skills.
In H. Reese & L. Lipsitt (Eds.), Advances in child development and behaviour: Volume 18. New
York, NY: Academic Press.

Sousa, D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2018). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience supports
the learner-friendly classroom. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Sousa, D., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2020, May). The sciences of teaching. Educational Leadership,
77(8), 14-20.

Sparks, S. D. (2015, January 28). Differentiated instruction: A primer. Education Week. Retrieved
from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/01/28/differentiated-instruction-a-
primer.html

Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment FOR learning: A path to success
in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328.

Strickland, C. A. (2007). Tools for high-quality differentiated instruction: An ASCD action tool.

Swanson, H. L. (1996). Learning disabilities and memory. In D. K. Reid, W. Hresko, & H. L.
Swanson (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to learning disabilities (pp. 187-314). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.


Tennessee Department of Education. (2018, June). Differentiation handbook: Strategies and

examples: Grades 6-12. Retrieved from
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/training/access_differentiation_handbook_6-
12.pdf

Thakur, K. (2014, November). Differentiated instruction in the inclusive classroom. Research
Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(7), p. 10-14. Retrieved from
http://www.isca.in/EDU_SCI/Archive/v2/i7/2.%20ISCA-RJEduS-2014-025.pdf

The Iris Center. (2013). Training enhancements: Study skills strategies: Part 1: Foundations for
effectively teaching study skills. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from
https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/ss1/

The Iris Center. (2021). Differentiated instruction: Maximizing the learning of all students.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from
https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/di/

Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A. I. (Eds.). (2014). Differentiating instruction: Planning for
universal design for college and career readiness (pp. 1-16). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Publishing Company [SAGE].

Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s
journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 77-87.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2000a). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. ERIC Digest, p.
1-7. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED443572

Tomlinson, C. A. (2000b). Reconcilable differences? Standards-based teaching and
differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-11.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.).

Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Deciding to teach them all. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 6-11.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2004). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms (2nd ed.).
Toronto, ON: Pearson.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd
ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].


Tomlinson, C. A. (2015). Teaching for excellence in academically diverse classrooms. Society (New
Brunswick), 52(3), 203-209.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd
ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Tomlinson, C. A. (2019). Leadership for differentiated classrooms. The School Superintendents
Association. Retrieved from https://aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=14956

Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000a). Leadership for differentiating schools & classrooms.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000b). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms:
Chapter 1: Understanding differentiated instruction: Building a foundation for leadership.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD]. Retrieved
from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/100216/chapters/Understanding-
Differentiated-Instruction@-Buildinga-Foundation-for-Leadership.aspx

Tomlinson, C. A., & Cunningham, E. C. (2003). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for
differentiating curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development [ASCD].

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2013). Better classroom management from day one. ASCD
Express, 8(22). Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol8/822-tomlinson.aspx

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiation instruction and understanding
by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Tomlinson, C. A., & Moon, T. R. (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated
classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Tomlinson, C. A., Moon, T. R., & Imbeau, M. D. (2015). White paper: Assessment and student
success in a differentiated classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
[ASCD]. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/assessment-
and-di-whitepaper.pdf

Tomlinson, C. A., & Murphy, M. (2015). Leading for differentiation: Growing teachers who grow
kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].


Tomlinson, C. A., & Strickland, C. A. (2003a). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for
differentiating curriculum: Grades K-5. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Tomlinson, C. A., & Strickland, C. A. (2003b). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for
differentiating curriculum: Grades 5-9. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

Tomlinson, C. A., & Strickland, C. A. (2005). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for
differentiating curriculum: Grades 9-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

UDLL Online. (2016). Universal design for learning: A best practice guideline. Retrieved from
https://www.ahead.ie/userfiles/files/shop/free/UDLL%20Online.pdf

Understood for All. (2019). Getting started with universal design for learning [UDL]. Retrieved
from
https://assets.ctfassets.net/p0qf7j048i0q/3vzjvQAnt6xj0l080yVqXg/6e51e59e0b5b5eadd5e1c
40ed135facd/Getting_started_with_universal_design_for_learning__UDL__Understood__1_.pdf

Universal Design for Learning Implementation & Research Network [UDL-IRN]. (2018). UDL in
the instructional process: Version 1.0. Lawrence, KS: Author. Retrieved from https://udl-
irn.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Instructional-Process.pdf

Universal Design for Learning Implementation & Research Network [UDL-IRN]. (2020).
Resources: Critical elements of UDL implementation. Retrieved from https://udl-
irn.org/home/udl-resources/

Utah State Board of Education & Hanover Research. (2019, May). Differentiated instruction: A
best practices report. Salt Lake City, UT: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.schools.utah.gov/file/1e842789-7836-4ed2-af1a-3232ee028d75

Vygotsky, L. S., (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Watts-Taffe, S., Laster, B. P., Broach, L., Marinak, B., McDonald Connor, C., & Walker-Dalhouse, D.
(2012). Differentiated instruction: Making informed teacher decisions. The Reading
Teacher, 66(4), 303-314.

West Virginia Department of Education. (n.d.). UDL guidelines checklist. Retrieved from
https://wvde.state.wv.us/osp/UDL/7.%20UDL%20Guidelines%20Checklist.pdf [Multiple
Checklists]


WETA Public Broadcasting Service. (2018). Reading rockets: Implementing the text structure
strategy in your classroom. Retrieved from
https://www.readingrockets.org/article/implementing-text-structure-strategy-your-classroom

WETA Public Broadcasting Service. (2021). Question-answer relationship: QAR. Retrieved from
https://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/question_answer_relationship

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2002). Understanding by design: Backwards design process. Retrieved
from https://www.d.umn.edu/~hrallis/courses/3204sp05/assignments/ubd_template.htm

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2004). The understanding by design professional development
workbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].
Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/books/mctighe2004_intro.pdf

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development [ASCD].

Wormeli, R. (2018). Fair isn’t always equal: Assessment & grading in the differentiated classroom
(2nd ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe
that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychology, 47(4), 302-314.

Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset
controversies? The American Psychologist, 75(9), 1269-1284.


Section 6: Appendices – Teacher Resources

Appendix A: Planning Template I

Figure 12. Backward Design Lesson Planning

Stage 1 – Desired Results
Maple Bear Learning Performance Standards

Understanding(s)/Goals: Essential Question(s):
Students will understand that . . . -What leading questions can help students
understand the essential concepts?”
-Emphasize the “heart” of the subject.
-This is a goal, not an objective. -Create questions to sustain learner interest.
-List the “big ideas” or concepts that students
will learn (not facts to be recalled). *Avoid questions with a single answer.

Student Objectives (Learning Outcomes):
Students will be able to . . .

-These are observable, measurable student outcomes that can be demonstrated & assessed
based on tangible evidence (listed in Stage 2).

*Stage 3 activities must be directly linked to helping students to: (a) achieve lesson/unit goals,
(b) answer the essential questions, and (c) exhibit the desired learning behaviours.

Stage 2 – Assessment Evidence

Performance Task(s): Other Evidence:
-Authentic, performance-based tasks where -Data from pre-assessment, formative
students apply their learning & demonstrate assessment & summative assessment tasks
their understanding -Individual or group-based assignments
-Tasks are designed around Bloom’s -Informal activities: thumbs up-thumbs down
Taxonomy (application, analysis, evaluation, & formal evaluations-quizzes, short-answer
creation) questions, written reflections, essays)
-Rubrics/checklists for performance/self-
audits


Stage 3 – Learning Plan

Learning Activities:
-This is the core of your lesson plan.
-Prepare a list of: (1) what the students will do in class and (2) how to prepare them to attain
the expected learning outcome(s).
-Determine what the teacher will do to promote learning and success.

Source: Adapted from Wiggins & McTighe, 2002

Appendix B: Planning Template II

Figure 13. Backward Design Lesson Planning

Stage 1 – Desired Results

Maple Bear Learning Performance Goals: What content, class, or program goals will be
targeted?

Understandings: Essential Questions:

Students will understand that . . . -What questions will promote understanding,
reflection & generalization?
-What are the “big ideas?”
-What understandings are desired?
-What misconceptions are expected?

Students will know . . . Students will be able to . . .

-What knowledge & skills will be learned? -What will students do with the
knowledge/skills?


Stage 2 – Assessment Evidence

Performance Tasks: Data Collection:

-How will students show understandings? -What data will be used to assess learning
-How will performance be judged (rubrics, (tests, observations, homework, journals, etc.)?
etc.)? -How will students reflect & self-assess?

Stage 3 – Learning Plan

Learning Tasks: What activities & strategies will facilitate achievement of the goals?

ASK if the plan: (1) assists teachers to identify students’ prior knowledge; (2) helps students
understand the learning destination & expectations; (3) grabs students’ attention; (4) ties key
ideas to students’ experiences; (5) schedules time for students to revise understandings (using
new knowledge); (6) invites students to self-audit; (6) includes DI approaches, based on needs;
& (7) boosts learning & engagement.

Source: Adapted from Wiggins & McTighe 2004


Index
3-2-1 Summary Strategy, 37 Exemplars, 41

Ability, 37 Exit Slips, 41
Accommodations, 37 Expert Learners, 41
Acquiring Strategies, 37 Expository Text Structure Strategy, 41
Activating Strategies, 37 Expository Texts, 41
Anchor Activities, 37 Fist-of-Five, 41
Anticipation Guides, 37 Flexible Groupings, 41
Assessment, 29 Flipped Classroom, 42
Assessment Techniques, 31 Frayer Model, 42
Assistive Technology, 38 Generalization (Transfer), 42
Backward Design, 22 Gist Statements, 42
Big Ideas, 38 Glossary, 37
Bloom’s Taxonomy, 15 Goal-Setting & Reflection, 42
Calming Space, 38 Good Teachers, 11
Centres/Stations, 38 Gradual Release of Responsibility (Fading),
Choice Boards, 38 42
Chunking, 38 Graffiti Wall/Board, 42
Class Profiles, 38 Graphic Organizers/Concept Maps, 42
Classrooms, 12 Inclusion, 43
Cloze Strategy, 38 Independent Projects, 43
Collaboration, 38 Interests, 21
Considerate text, 39 Jigsaws, 43
Consolidating Strategies, 39 Journals, 43
Constructivism, 39 Key Features of DI, 15
Content, 15 KWL Charts, 43
Cooperative Learning, 39 Learning Continuum, 12
Cubing, 39 Learning Contracts, 43
Cues (Prompts), 39 Learning Environment (Affect), 17
Cultural Sensitivity, 39 Learning Logs, 43
Curriculum Compacting, 39 Learning Menus, 44
Data Collection, 18 Learning Preferences, 22
Debate Team Carousel, 40 Learning Profiles, 21
Descriptive Feedback, 40 Lesson Development, 34
Differentiated Technology-Based Tools, 29 Lesson Planning, 34
Differentiation, 10 Literature Circles, 44
Direct (Explicit) Instruction, 40 Low Floor High Ceiling Tasks, 44
Echo Reading, 40 Metacognition, 44
Equity, 40 Metacognitive Note-Taking, 44
Essential Questions, 40 Mind Maps (Webs), 44
Evaluation, 41 Mini Lessons for Writing, 44
Executive Functioning, 41 Mnemonic Devices, 44

Modifications, 45 Strategy Groups, 47

Multiple Intelligences, 45 Strategy Instruction Step-By-Step, 35
Orbitals, 45 Strategy Selection, 35
Paragraph Templates, 45 Student Profiles, 48
Planning Templates, 70 Student-Centred Teachers, 48
Pre-K Journals, 45 Sustained Silent Reading [SSR], 48
Problem-Based Learning, 45 T-Charts, 48
Process, 16 Teacher Responsibilities, 31
Product, 17 Technology, 26
Question-Answer Relationship [QAR], 45 Testing Situations, 33
Rainbow Retellings, 46 The Six Facets of Understanding, 48
RAP, 46 Thematic Teaching, 48
Reader’s Theatre, 46 Think-Alouds, 48
Readiness, 19 Think-Pair-Share, 48
Respectful Tasks, 46 Three-Before-Me., 48
Response Cards, 46 Three-Tiered Pyramid Model, 8
Scaffolding, 46 Tic-Tac-Toe, 49
Schemata, 46 Tiering, 49
Seasonal Partners, 47 UDL Learning Activities, 28
Self-Monitoring, 47 UDL Principles & Guidelines, 25
Sketch-to-Stretch, 47 Universal Design for Learning, 25
Socratic Questioning, 47 Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, 27
Stages of Backward Design, 24 Venn Diagrams, 49
Sticky Notes, 47 Voice & Choice, 49
Story Maps, 47 Word Maps, 49
Strategies List, 36 Zone of Proximal Development [ZPD], 49


Maple Bear - Responsive Differentiated Instruction Handbook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maple Bear - Responsive Differentiated Instruction Handbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maple Bear Global Schools

Responsive Differentiated Instruction

1 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

2 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

3 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

4 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

5 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

6 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

7 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

8 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Section 2: Model for Addressing Diversity

9 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

10 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Figure 1. The Three-Tiered Pyramid Planning Model

Tier 1 [Universal Programming, School-Wide Supports]

11 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

12 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

13 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Benefits of Differentiated Instruction

14 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

To maximize accessibility, accommodate differences, and cultivate success, teachers must

15 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Table 1. What Differentiated Instruction Is and Is Not

16 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

(A) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Where to Begin?

17 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Table 2. Differentiated Activities Requiring Low-Prep and High-Prep

18 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

(B) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: 4 Key Features

19 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Examples of Differentiating Content:

20 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

• Provide manipulatives and other scaffolds, based on student needs

21 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

22 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

23 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

24 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

25 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

26 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Figure 6. Learning Preferences Continuum Assessment Chart

27 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

2. Establish • Culminating Assessment

28 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

29 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Continuum of Assessment Tools

30 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

31 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Table 3. The Three UDL Principles

32 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Figure 9. The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines

33 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Table 4. Student-Friendly UDL Learning Activities

34 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

35 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

(F) Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Assessment

36 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

37 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

Teacher Responsibilities in Differentiated Assessment

38 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

39 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)

• creates opportunities for students to self-advocate

40 All Rights Reserved - Maple Bear Global Schools Ltd. (2021)