Personalized Learning vs Differentiation

Moving Beyond Differentiation into Personalized Learning

Teachers are constantly asked to take on more and more as professionals.  With class sizes ranging from 30-40 learners, there is always more to do to meet the needs of all their learners; implement and plan for instructional strategies, interventions, enrichments, technology, collaboration, etc., etc.  And yet, there are still those learners who, regardless, never really engage either for lack of effort or ability to do so.  It’s no wonder teacher burnout is so high and many are reluctant to take on “one more thing”.  So when Barbara Bray pointed out at a training on personalized learning that teachers are doing too much of the work she intrigued our interest in learning more about personalized learning vs differentiation.  

Six years ago leveled courses for 9th grade English in our school district were eliminated.  The new course was titled, Pre-AP English 9, with the intent that all learners would have access to rigor and be exposed to skills needed to take an AP class as a junior or senior.  This was an exciting change for us as we saw it as an active step to make student’s learning opportunities more equitable.  In order to meet the needs of a wide range of abilities, we became “master differentiators”.  Differentiation is a well-known practice in education where the teacher tailors instruction to meet individual needs.  While this instructional strategy is useful, we find personalized learning to be so much more effective.  We will illustrate by explaining three differences.

#1 Differentiation	Personalized Learning
Teacher designs different learning experiences and assigns them to the learners.	Learners have voice and choice in how they access, engage, and express information.

Questions What resources can I provide to support learner's learning paths? What are the different ways learners can access (get), engage (do), and express (show) information?

Differentiation:

We used to create 3 different tiers for all assignments that would get more in depth with each level.  All assignments related back to the same standard but offered 3 different entry points into working toward a standard.  One of the downsides of this approach was all learners were asked to do the same thing at the same time (work on their chosen tier while we as teachers tried to make it around to as many learners as possible), which was too slow for some and too fast for others.     

Personalized Learning:

Now our approach has changed.  Learners are now asked to apply skills to open ended topics that address the standards, and learners choose how they engage in that topic.  Our in class work time used to be all learners working on their chosen tiers. Now learners choose from an array of options for engaging in the work.  Typical choices are teacher seminar (working with teacher), collaborative groups (working in a small group) or independent work.  Depending on the standard and topic we may provide additional choices such as a Socratic Seminar (group discussion based on a text), or other exploration opportunities. The work looks different depending on the choice a learner makes.  We still help learners generate ideas as to how to tackle the topic/theme/concept of the day, but in the end they have an incredible amount of choice.  We take on the role of the “guide on the side” as opposed to the “director at the center”. As mentioned in earlier blog posts, this voice and choice time has increased student engagement tremendously.  Learners feel empowered by the choice and have more buy in.  Also, we find the learners that need extra guidance almost always choose teacher seminar, so we now have 7-8 learners who may have been off task because they don’t know how to begin sitting with us all at once.

Besides giving them choice in how to learn, we give them choice in how they want to meet the standards.   That brings us to our second difference between differentiation and personalized learning.    

       

#2 Differentiation	Personalized Learning
Teacher creates different assignments for learners to choose from.	Learning connects to interests, passions and/or skills.

Question: How can I create flexibility and choice in content, skill, and knowledge development in order to meet leaners where they are and spark their desire to learn?

When it comes to assessing learning, traditionally teachers create projects or tests for learners to complete.  With differentiation a teacher may create a menu of assignments from which learners choose.  Teachers put ample amount of time and creative thought into designing the assignments and then learners complete them.  While we still have assignments that all learners complete, such as essays (literary analysis, expository, and narrative), we also allow for learners to dictate how they will demonstrate meeting a standard.  This allows the learner to express original thought, refine critical thinking skills, problem solve, and grow in learning independence.  Most importantly, this also allows for learners to tie into their passions and interests.  We have seen learners more excited, engaged and motivated when they get to design their own summatives (assignments that measure mastery of a standard).  We have witnessed individuals stretching themselves further than they imagine, thus enhancing their self efficacy.

In a typical unit we begin with the “why” and show the standards that learners will work toward meeting.  As Jim Rickbaugh says, “If one starts and stays with the why, this opens the flexibility for the how.”  To form the foundation of the ‘why” for learners, we develop an essential question based on the standards that are being addressed.  Next, we map out the summatives (“final “ assessments that measure competency), that will be required for all learners to complete.  We also make sure to incorporate voice and choice in meeting standards (as demonstrated in our previous blog “3 Pillars of Personalized Learning”).  For us, the voice and choice come into play with regards to answering the essential question.  

Consider the following example, used for a novel unit where To Kill a Mockingbird serves as the vehicle for the learning.  For one standard, we have learners complete a literary analysis around the evolution of theme (learners chose the theme).  This is a staple and it’s a common summative each learner needs to complete. Learners were also asked to meet the standard of:  9.9.8.8 As an individual or in collaboration, create a multimedia work, a remix of original work and the work of others, or a piece of digital communication for a specific purpose.  Learners needed to answer the question, “How is one inspired, influenced, or impacted by their community?” (Also known as the “why”).  Learners were able to express their understanding through choice.  We encouraged them to consider their personal passions around elements of a community be it volunteering, sports, environment, literacy, music, and art just to name a few.  Their projects were authentic, meaningful and inspiring-all because we tapped into one of the most underutilized resources in classrooms today, learners themselves.  

Example projects  

#3 Differentiation	Personalized Learning
Teacher passes out and directs learning	Learner setting goals, self monitoring, and directing learning with guidance from the teacher.

Questions: Based on what I know about my individual learners, what actions can I take to increase their learning success? What instruction will my students need to support the next stage of learning?

The gap for some learners gets bigger and bigger because they cannot keep up with the pace of a class.  A teacher introduces content or skills and if a learner does not understand the materials or is unable to complete the task, the class keeps moving on.  The approach assumes kids can effectively be taught in “batches”.  Should a learner “fall behind” he or she would be expected to get extra help before or after school, and for some kids that is simply not an option.  Those kids miss out, lose interest and begin to lack confidence.  

There are many external factors that keep teachers moving at a certain pace, the standardized tests, the large amount of standards to cover and content a teacher is expected to get through in a school year.  Differentiation typically does not allow for different pacing, but different choices in how a learner may show their learning.  Personalized learning is achieved by learners setting goals, monitoring, and directing their own learning, so pacing can vary.  We have found this experience to be about equity, all learners are being met where they are at and allowed to slow down or speed ahead based on their readiness.  With the ratio of our classes (the number of learners to teacher) this can be challenging, but we have found ways to allow for multiple paces in our 9th grade Pre-Ap English class.  We accomplish this in a few different ways, and in each unit it works differently, but we plan out “pacing parameters” for an entire unit and learners can then navigate their way through the unit.  We demonstrate this in other blogs, but here are some different unit maps, the pacing calendars are in the middle of the documents. TKMB Personalized   The Other Side of the Sky Personalized  

Correspondingly, we ask learners to goal set at the beginning and end of each unit to guide learners through the process.  We still offer direct instruction (teacher seminar) and still have large and small group discussions based on various topics that all learners can participate in regardless of where they are at in the pacing calendar.  Learners have reflected that they like the independence, flexibility, and extra time this method allows for them to process and truly gather not only what they learn but how.  The learners who move through at a faster pace, have time to go on to a challenge, extend their thinking, or have more time to process and go deeper into the content. Our class is organically evolving based on learners’ needs, interests, and relevancy.