Thoughts on Differentiated Instruction...

     This week I began reading Rick Wormeli's Differentiation: From Planning to Practice. First of all, this is a great text. I mean, GREAT. Wormeli is so practical; he really paints the picture of what his ideas look like in the planning process and in the classroom. No huge chunks of theory here -- just take it and use it immediately.
     Since I've been reading up so much lately on RTI, I can't help but draw comparisons and links between these two instructional concepts. In fact, I wish there were a nicer way to combine the two acronyms (who working in education doesn't want fewer acronyms?), but DIRTI just doesn't convey the clean interest I have in both. 
     Why do I think they are so related? Because they both focus on providing instruction that is based on individuals' and small groups' disparate needs. In Buffum et al's (2009) Pyramid Response to Intervention: RTI, Professional Learning Communities, and How to Respond When Kids Don't Learn, the authors make a great case for differentiating instruction within the core curriculum (aka, Tier 1). As they put it, "a Tier 1 curriculum must be prioritized so that students have ample opportunity to master power standards" (p. 74). And as we know in education, the same opportunity to master a power standard will not work well for all students. Therefore, it's important to differentiate instruction even in Tier 1, instead of considering Tiers 2 and 3 to "count" for differentiation.
     Buffum et al (2009) warn us that the two biggest challenges we face in incorporating differentiation into our Tier 1 (or core curriculum -- the curriculum that all students receive and that should, according to RTI research, effectively reach about 80% of a given student population) are classroom management and the selection of quality instructional activities, especially those that students can complete independently (p. 75). And so, I consider these two pieces to be excellent starting points in thinking about and planning for a classroom that incorporates differentiated instruction. In upcoming blogs, I'll be diving into both areas, especially in light of DI. I'll also be exploring how Understanding by Design (or UBD -- oh good, another acronym!) fits into these practices as well, thanks to a great book co-authored by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe called -- you guessed it -- Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design.
     I guess the moral of the story is that sometimes instructional innovations or initiatives really can and do naturally overlap, especially when they are based in strong pedagogy. The task of the educator is to not become overwhelmed by DI, RTI, UBD, and other acronyms being thrown his or her way, but to make sense of these theories and ideas about instruction by looking for their common elements. Sounds like a starting point to me!