A teacher’s take on the ‘setting’ vs ‘mixed-ability’ debate, and the trouble with differentiation…
A parent, following spending the morning in class as a helper during a reading session, asked me, “Wow, do you find it hard to teach with all of the kids being at such different levels? Some of them are really coming along wonderfully. It’s still a slow process for a handful though. “
A post I read a while ago by JackTeacher88, got me thinking about the way classes are structured in most Australian Primary Schools. The setting vs mixed-ability debate isn’t one I’ve ever paid much notice to, because ‘streaming’/’setting’ or like-ability classes are not common in local schools – In fact, I’ve never heard of it occurring in any of my local Primary Schools. Whilst some High Schools set their classes up so that, for example, all of the struggling math students are in the same class, all of the highly-able students are grouped together, and so on, I can’t think of examples in which this happens at the junior level. Sure, there are many instances in which students work in like-ability groups. This happens in my class when I wish for students to work with like-minded students, to enable appropriate levels of support and challenge and sometimes simply for ease of differentiation. In the year level I teach, we also sometimes group children from across the cohort, such as in spelling where we might decide to have students work with students from other classes working on the same spelling feature, for targeted instruction. Some schools offer ‘gifted and talented’ programs or programs such as ‘group literacy support’, but these students would also be part of a regular grade.
So then, back to that parent’s question, how do we teach when the kids are all so different?
Herein lies the trouble many have with ‘differentiation.’ Does differentiation tell us that we need to plan, within the same lesson, different learning intentions, different tasks, gather different resources and orchestrate a different learning experience for each student, or each group of students? That does sound like an awful lot of work!
This blog post, also by JackTeacher88, points out a flawed model of ‘differentiation’, seen certainly when I was at school myself (hopefully not much any more!). That model saw all kids start out with the easiest level of work, the simplest task or set of problems, and as they finished, they simply got more work which gradually increased in difficulty. This meant that by the end of the lesson or spread across a unit, the struggling students would be left fumbling their way through their “dumb kid work”, whilst the highly-able students will have progressed through to work appropriate for their challenge level, leaving the rest of the class somewhere in the middle.
What’s worse, that aforementioned model of differentiation, or no differentiation at all? That is, just pitching the lesson, resources, content and task for the ‘middle kids’, whilst letting the strugglers flounder in the hope that they’ll finally learn something, and leaving those requiring more challenge or extension to go through the motion or completing the work that they find too easy, resulting in boredom. The Telegraph published this article which describes mixed-ability classes as letting down the brightest students; those being ‘held back’ by the fact that the teacher needs to teach the rest of the class ‘easier’ work – “schools fail to stretch the brightest and weakest students by placing them in mixed ability lessons”.
Well, I once heard that differentiation is easiest when it isn’t necessary! That is, if all students are at the same level, the teacher can plan one lesson, with one learning intention and the same content, resources and task which will be perfect for all students. Right?
Honestly, I’ve only ever taught mixed-ability classes, so don’t feel like I’m in a position to pass judgement either way. Are there any teacher bloggers reading this that feel strongly one way or the other? Do any of you teach only like-ability classes?
If mixed-ability classes are the norm, what are we to do? Go with that ‘challenge-gradually-increasing’ model, the ‘pitch-for-the-middle-students’ model, adopt a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach? Of course I’m being simplistic and teachers have a wide range of strategies for ensuring all students get the support and challenge they deserve, but you do get the point I’m trying to make. Might things just be better for all involved if classes were in fact full of students ‘at the same level’?