Differentiate
For me, it is the metaphors to do with sports that make the most sense in understanding differentiation. I have taught a lot of kids to ski, so I can think of it this way: We all start as novices, but some of us have some natural aptitude, so perhaps we move away from ‘pizza wedges’ naturally, brining our skis together quite quickly. Others of us may need to practice little tricks like jumping or picking up a foot to feel the right movement into a parallel turn. Some might fall many times before mastering a Green Circle trail and some may careen down it on the first run, testing their control and feeling their speed. Some may need to watch an instructor or listen to her talk about how one’s legs should move and feel, some use a little ‘worm’ at the end of the ski tips, or benefit from following ‘S’ lines traced in the snow, and others still may not learn a thing until they’ve thrown a tantrum and been bribed with hot chocolate at the end of the day. In the end, all skiers are aiming at getting down the mountain. If, after several years of practice, I can hammer down a narrow wooded trail, does it matter that I fell a lot when I was learning or got my head stuck in a tree well? If another skier takes a few more years of practice than I did, but today we ski together as equals, does that mean I’m better than he is overall, because I have fewer falls to average into the equation? Learning anything requires an individual path. If teachers cannot appreciate this and act accordingly, not only will there be less success at getting all those kids down the mountain, but likely they will alienate many types who do not benefit from the single preferred method of instruction. This type of teaching is wrong, as it prohibits kids from being as good as they can be.
For me, it is the metaphors to do with sports that make the most sense in understanding differentiation. I have taught a lot of kids to ski, so I can think of it this way: We all start as novices, but some of us have some natural aptitude, so perhaps we move away from ‘pizza wedges’ naturally, brining our skis together quite quickly. Others of us may need to practice little tricks like jumping or picking up a foot to feel the right movement into a parallel turn. Some might fall many times before mastering a Green Circle trail and some may careen down it on the first run, testing their control and feeling their speed. Some may need to watch an instructor or listen to her talk about how one’s legs should move and feel, some use a little ‘worm’ at the end of the ski tips, or benefit from following ‘S’ lines traced in the snow, and others still may not learn a thing until they’ve thrown a tantrum and been bribed with hot chocolate at the end of the day. In the end, all skiers are aiming at getting down the mountain. If, after several years of practice, I can hammer down a narrow wooded trail, does it matter that I fell a lot when I was learning or got my head stuck in a tree well? If another skier takes a few more years of practice than I did, but today we ski together as equals, does that mean I’m better than he is overall, because I have fewer falls to average into the equation? Learning anything requires an individual path. If teachers cannot appreciate this and act accordingly, not only will there be less success at getting all those kids down the mountain, but likely they will alienate many types who do not benefit from the single preferred method of instruction. This type of teaching is wrong, as it prohibits kids from being as good as they can be.