Differentiating K-12 Instruction for Students at All Levels of Ability

In differentiated instruction, teachers adjust curriculum and content delivery to optimize learning for all students within a general education classroom. Through differentiated instruction in K-12, teachers provide appropriate instruction for students at all levels of ability: below-target students, on-target students, above-target students, English language learners, and students with disabilities.

Research supports the use of differentiated instruction to improve student learning for students with and without disabilities.

Introduction to differentiation

Carol Ann Tomlinson is a former elementary and secondary public-school teacher and a professor at the University of Virginia’s Curry School of Education and Human Development. Tomlinson is a renowned expert on differentiation—she has authored 17 books and over 200 articles on the topic.

Tomlinson recommends that teachers differentiate instruction based on student readiness (i.e., a student’s capacity to perform a task—which may be greater than their demonstrated ability), student interest (i.e., engagement with content stemming from a student’s personality or experiences), and student learning profile (i.e., the most efficient and effective way to promote an individual student’s understanding). Teachers should cluster, or group, students based on one or more of the above three criteria.

To create clusters of students within the classroom (e.g., a group of students with a similar readiness level, a group of students with similar interests), Tomlinson suggests that teachers should consistently and frequently assess students.

Strategy #1: Assessment

Tomlinson documents three types of assessments that teachers use in the classroom to support student learning: pre-assessments, formative assessments, and summative assessments. Of these three, Tomlinson notes that pre-assessments and formative assessments provide the most useful information for differentiated instruction in K-12.

Overview of Pre- and Formative Assessments Suggested by Tomlinson

Tomlinson emphasizes that teachers should use assessments to understand students’ development in accordance with learning goals (KUDs). This approach allows teachers to promote differentiated instruction in K-12 primarily based on student readiness. In addition, however, Tomlinson notes that teachers can use pre- and formative assessments to understand student interests and learning profiles.

Strategy #2: Skills-based grouping

Tomlinson suggests that teachers use information from pre- and formative assessments to assign students to clusters. According to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) it is “impossible” and “unwieldy” to differentiate instruction without first assigning students to small groups. Grouping allows teachers to target instruction based on student skills and needs, thereby providing appropriate opportunities for all students.

EAB’s research study Narrowing the Third Grade Reading Gap profiles best practices to group elementary school students for literacy instruction. EAB researchers included one of these practices—skills-based grouping—below. Teachers should implement skills-based grouping to deliver differentiated elementary-level reading instruction. Teachers may consider skills-based grouping for differentiated instruction in K-12 at other levels and for other subjects.

Traditional student grouping for reading instruction often masks reading needs

Teachers often design elementary school reading groups around non-specific reading levels and average benchmark scores using universal screeners. Although these data help identify which students may need more intensive instructional support, it does not provide sufficient insight into the precise nature of students’ skill deficits. As a result, students assigned to groups through this “one-size-fits-all” intervention approach are less likely to achieve meaningful gains in their reading progress. For example, when teachers rely on non-specific data to group students, 50% of interventions teach concepts that students have already mastered. In addition, 22% of students who develop serious reading difficulties remain undetected.

To create student groupings that will maximize the effectiveness of differentiated instruction in K-12, teachers should not rely solely on universal screening benchmarks to create groups. Instead, teachers should also incorporate student scores from diagnostics that identify specific student skill gaps. Diagnostics serve as a pre-assessments that allow teachers to understand students’ mastery of specific skills prior to delivering instruction.

Implement skills-based grouping in five, best-practice steps to effectively differentiate elementary school reading instruction

By grouping students based on skill-deficits, teachers can better ensure that differentiated instruction is relevant to all students within each group. Teachers should continually assess students—through formative assessments or repeated diagnostics—to document mastery and subsequently revise student groupings. EAB’s Skills-Based Grouping Toolkit includes a skills-based grouping audit, which provides detailed implementation guidance for successful skills-based grouping.

Implementing skills-based grouping

EAB’s best-practice research demonstrates that teachers should use information about student mastery from formative assessments to adjust skills-based groupings on a regular basis. For example, a 2012 Educational Leadership article reports that, in fourth and fifth grade math classrooms at a Philadelphia school, any student interested in moving to a more advanced group can do so based on their performance on formative assessments.

Integrate differentiation and instruction with content-, process-, and product-based strategies

Once teachers have assessed and grouped students, Tomlinson recommends that teachers use three further, overarching strategies to differentiate instruction. Through these strategies, teachers can continuously embed differentiation within their instructional approach, because they align with the three major components of instruction: content (i.e., the material students need to learn), process (i.e., students’ actions taken to learn the material), and product (i.e., how students demonstrate mastery). Tomlinson emphasizes that teachers should plan for differentiated instruction in K-12 whenever they plan for instruction.

3 strategies to differentiate instruction

Strategy #3: Content-based differentiation

Teachers can use content-based differentiated instruction in K-12 to present students with a version of a unit’s material that is best aligned to students’ readiness, interest, and/or learning profile. To ensure that students master the same standards regardless of any variations in content, Tomlinson recommends several research-backed tactics. These tactics empower teachers to present the same, core standards to all students (both struggling learners and advanced learners) in different ways based primarily on students’ readiness, but also based on students’ interest and learning profile.

Strategy #4: Process-based differentiation

During process-based differentiated instruction in K-12, students complete different activities, practice techniques, and exercises to learn unit standards. Teachers differentiate processes primarily based on students’ readiness, but teachers can also consider student interest and learning profile.

Strategy #5: Product-based differentiation

“Products” refer to the culminating assignment or assessment for a unit of study. Teachers can use product-based differentiated instruction in K-12 to assess student mastery while still allowing students to demonstrate their knowledge in a variety of ways. Product-based differentiation encourages teachers to allow students to opt for alternatives to traditional, written tests in accordance with their level of readiness, interest, and learning profile.

Tomlinson explains that students can still achieve high scores on standardized tests, even if they opt for a differentiated product (i.e., an alternative to a traditional test or paper) to demonstrate their knowledge throughout the year. When students learn and demonstrate their knowledge in the way that best matches their readiness, interest, and learning profile, they learn more and build confidence in their abilities. These outcomes, in turn, may positively impact student performance during standardized testing.

Example product-based differentiation tactic: Tic-tac-toe

Using the following table, students choose three boxes and complete the product described in the box. Teachers may require students to choose three products that form a line, or one choice from each row and column. This allows students to select product options that align with their interests and learning profile. In some instances, teachers can create multiple tables with different levels of product challenge to further differentiate by student readiness.

Accompanying strategy: Universal design for learning

Neuroscientists developed the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework in the 1990s to optimize teaching and learning for all people. Based on the idea that students learn in diverse ways, UDL’s three guiding principles ask educators to provide multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression in the classroom. In this way, UDL and differentiation embody a similar philosophy—both acknowledge that different students need to take different paths to achieve learning goals. Under the UDL framework, teachers do not necessarily assign students to different content, processes, or products. Instead, students themselves choose the path that best fits them.

To implement UDL, teachers plan lessons to fully engage students on the margins of each class (i.e., the highest performing students and the lowest performing students or students with disabilities) and therefore create a richer learning environment for all students. By including options for high achievers and for struggling students within each lesson, teachers challenge and create inclusive learning opportunities for every student in the classroom.

Educational consultant and UDL expert Katie Novak compares teaching a class of students to preparing a meal for dinner party attendees with a variety of dietary restrictions. When teachers differentiate instruction, they prepare a different menu for each attendee. When teachers use UDL, they provide a buffet of all the different menu items so that attendees can select the right meal for them. UDL, therefore, is inherently differentiated—UDL can provide support and a valuable framework for teachers to effectively implement differentiated instruction.

Universal design for learning and
other inclusive practices

Review our research on the UDL implementation process and related teacher professional development opportunities at four profiled districts.