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! 

RTI: "Really Terrific Instruction," or Something More...?

     I just finished reading Rachel Brown-Chidsey and Mark W. Steege's second edition of Response to Intervention: Principles and Strategies for Effective Practice (2010). Now, while I learned a lot about how to implement an RTI model in a school or district from this book, and will most likely blog about some of the strategies outlined at a later date, for today I'd like to tackle one phrase that is used not only in this text, but that I have seen used several times in connection with writings about RTI, namely that, in addition to standing for Response to Intervention, RTI can just be thought of as "really terrific instruction."
     Now I won't lie. When I see this in print, it (initially) makes me feel great. And it echoes my own sentiments when I first read a new text about RTI. I find myself thinking, "Yes. Data-based instruction. This is just what good teachers have always done, and now we call it RTI." I've had countless conversations with educational colleagues about RTI and other initiatives that carry the same tone -- "Oh, we can do this. This is easy. We've already been doing this forever." And while these thoughts can ease the stress that creeps up with a new initiative, something always lingers at the back of my brain, nagging me.
     What nags me is this -- I don't really think RTI (or many other initiatives) are all that easy, or just come down to really terrific instruction. And I don't think we are doing our profession a favor by consistently trying to make them seem easy. Some of this is really complicated stuff. But that's okay. It should be. We educators work in a really complicated field. We are professionals, and, as such, we can delve into some really complicated stuff together and learn and grow. When we tell ourselves and our colleagues that a certain initiative is going to be easy to implement or that it's just "common-sense teaching," that can serve to isolate our profession. What teacher, when hearing these types of statements, is going to come forward and say, "Actually, I've been struggling with RTI. It's pretty tough to implement, and I need some help"? Most will just become insecure, blaming a false sense of incompetence. And -- worse -- give up on the new initiative before it's had a chance to succeed.
     So, I have a challenge for myself and for my fellow educators: let's stop trying to make some things seem easier than what they are. Let's admit that some things -- like progress monitoring all the students in one class on a daily and weekly and monthly basis, and then using that data to try a variety of instructional strategies and interventions to teach a variety of students, and then switching up those strategies when some don't work in order to teach each student in the best way possible -- yes, things like that aren't easy. And maybe shouldn't be. But, if we admit these challenges together we can being to fully meet them together. Sounds like a goal to me. I will continue to blog about RTI and about other instructional initiatives and strategies as I study them and learn about them. But I will not sugarcoat them with platitudes. Nor will I give up on them. I will work and collaborate with colleagues to determine the best ways to make them work for our students.