Standardization vs. Differentiation

Different Values

The struggle to implement differentiation into education is not a new one. Americans hold different views about the purpose of education. Some believe that formal education is to provide workers for industries. Others see formal education as the arm of economic development with the assumed correlation that more education means higher paying jobs. Others believe that formal education is for training the social beliefs of the nation. Still others believe that formal education is to create citizens who can both govern and be governed. Lastly, there is a group who believes that formal education should be for self-fulfillment and growth.

These competing values influence the debate about standardization and differentiation. On one hand, industrial and political influencers push for standardization, which establishes a minimum set of competencies necessary for productive citizens and employees. On the other hand, others believe that society will benefit the most if education focuses on individual needs and interests, which creates engaged and innovative life-long learners who contribute to society in diverse ways.

Can Differentiate Work in a World of Mandated Learning? 

According to Carol Ann Tomlinson, an expert in differentiation, “What we call differentiation is not a recipe for teaching. It is not an instructional strategy. It is not what a teacher does when he or she has time. It is a way of thinking about teaching and learning. It is a philosophy” (2000).

Tomlinson believes that learners must be treated differently because they bring their own interests, styles of learning, experiences, and readiness to learn to the classroom. She believes that learners need varying paces to absorb information and need different levels of support with different concepts. This is the foundation of differentiation. Supporters of differentiation believe that schools must assess learners needs and maximize the opportunity to cross the learning threshold at whatever level the learner is at.

Understanding that differentiated learning is a philosophy of teaching that pulls its roots from various scientific disciplines and is not a prescribed method of instruction should help educators apply its principles to standardized lessons. Teachers can differentiate by altering the way something is taught based on student’s readiness, interests, and learning profile. The teacher can maintain the standardized objective and the level of achievement that must be obtained while offering multiple learning opportunities for gain understanding. Is this more work? Yes, but supporters of differentiation believe that it is in the best interest of the learner.
Consider this example: A language arts teacher wants to teach a lesson on identifying and understanding inferences. The teacher can assign the class a story to read and a worksheet to complete with questions about inferences, or the teacher can assign differentiated groups to either a story to read or a video clip to watch, or a small group discussion about inferences. At the end of the session, she brings all of the students back together for an assessment. The teacher might also decide to allow the students choice in how they represent their understanding inferences, but are all measured against the same level of proficiency.

Standards vs. Differentiation

One of the conflicts between standardization and differentiation is the strong consequences for schools, teachers, and students if standardized goals are not met. Political pressure puts the need for standardization above differentiation. Schools are pressured to make sure that all students learn the minimum standards, or they may lose funding and and face a government-controlled takeover. Teachers are pressured to ensure goals are met because the results influence annual evaluations and even compensation. Students are pressured by the standardized goals because failure can hinder progression to the next grade or class placement.

With the standardized goals comes additional standardized tests. In preparation, schools use predictor tests to evaluate how well students will do on the standardized tests. This could be seen as an opportunity for differentiation; however, it creates a race against the clock to teach all of the standards. Predictive tests, like Acuity, are given in many districts three times a year. Standardized tests in many states are given twice a year. Each of these tests takes several days to complete. All of this time dedicated to testing removes time from teaching. For this reason, many teachers do not attempt differentiation, seek mastery, or include enrichment activities. They simply teach to the test.

Another conflict between standardization and differentiation is the standardized camp’s limited definition of success. For example, a student enters his junior high math class almost two grade levels behind. The teacher measures the child’s level of proficiency at the beginning of the year using a predictive test. The teacher, in an attempt to differentiate, helps the student create a learning plan with the specific learning goals that the student needs to master. The teacher works closely with the student all year monitoring and communicating progress. The student’s confidence begins to grow and his effort level increases. At the end of the school year, the student takes the standardized test. Although he raises his score by 46 points, far more than most of his peers, he still fails to pass the minimum level for standardization. From the differentiation point of view, this student is a success. From the standardization point of view, this student has failed to progress. Which is a better indication of learning? Which will better motivate the student to continue to grow?

Grading and Differentiated Learning

In this academic world where so much rides on a standardized score, students who rise above the standard are not encouraged to continue their growth and students who fall below the standard are discouraged from trying. Students, who are very different from each other are compared, not on their efforts or growth, but on their ability to cross a line that some will never pass and other will never fall below. Is this a reason to eliminate standardization? No, but it is a battle cry to place more value on growth than an arbitrary number. If students are assessed on the mastery of concepts, than mastery should be the focus and differentiation should be the prevailing philosophy that drives it.

References
Cuban, L. (2012). Standards vs. Customization: Finding a Balance. For Each to Excel, 10-15.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable Differences? Standards-Based Teaching and Differentiation. How to Differentiate Instruction, 6-11.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2013). Assessment, Grading, and Differentiation. In C. A. Tomlinson, & T. R. Moon, Assessment and Student Success in a Differentiated Classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.