WIXLIB

Running head: DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLDifferentiation at Winder-Barrow Middle SchoolPrepared by Ashley P. BaileyPrepared for Dr. Jennifer WoodPrincipal, Winder-Barrow Middle SchoolApril 11th, 2011

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLExecutive SummaryThis is a report of the findings regarding the implementation of ProfessionalDevelopment opportunities on Differentiation at Winder-Barrow Middle School. The belowpaper outlines the purposes behind the evaluation, methods used in collecting data, resultsgathered through data analysis and recommendations. Differentiation is evident in theclassrooms at Winder-Barrow Middle School. However, teachers feel the need of morespecific direction for their content in the area of differentiation. Teachers feel comfortablewith the tools they have so far, but want more. Below is the complete report.

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLDifferentiation at Winder-Barrow Middle SchoolIntroductionThe Barrow County School system recently implemented a new initiative entitled FDA– Feedback-Differentiation-Assessment. The individual schools in the county initiatedprofessional learning to increase teacher preparedness in these three areas. The scope ofthis study was to investigate the impact of the professional learning in the area ofdifferentiation. Differentiation is a way to tailor classroom learning to individual studentneeds. According to Dawson and Dana in the British Journal of Educational Technology,differentiation in the classroom is necessary for a successful learning environment. Theybelieve that with differentiation appropriately implemented, comes fundamental pedagogicalchange in the teacher and the school. I have to ask myself, did this happen with theimplementation of FDA? It did happen, to some extent.The evaluation of differentiation as part of the Professional Developmentimplementation at Winder-Barrow Middle School was completed through the use of a surveycompleted by the faculty and staff of Winder-Barrow Middle School and through theinformation gathered at a follow up focus group. Although there are many facets ofdifferentiation, this evaluation focused on the implementation of the professionaldevelopment components of the Feedback-Differentiation-Assessment (FDA), a county-wideinitiative. This program has been implemented in each school, but for this evaluation, onlyinformation gathered at WBMS was evaluated.Before beginning this evaluation project, an article review was conducted. Articlesfrom educational forums across the world were reviewed and summarized to gain furtherknowledge on the concept of Differentiation in the classroom. Tovey (1997), in PupilIdentity and Differentiation in British Public Schools, described his evaluation ofdifferentiation in his local schools. He described how the differentiation works whenimplemented completely. This article brought a very important question mind as theevaluation was being conducted. Did the teachers have complete implementation of

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLdifferentiation into their classroom before the evaluation was conducted? The answer can befound in the following documentation. This is a very important aspect because according tothe Tovey article (1997), implementation must be complete before differentiation can besuccessful in the classroom setting.Through this evaluation, it was discovered that differentiation comes in manypackages. Throughout the evaluation, I discovered many different differentiation strategiesthat were being implemented in the school. Goodnough (2007) describes differentiation interms of Project-Based Learning environments as well as basic teaching and learning in theclassroom. This was evident in many classrooms. It was also evident that the professionallearning should continue to bring all teachers on board.PurposeThe purpose of this evaluation was to discover whether or not the ProfessionalDevelopment opportunities were successfully implemented into the classroom, and whetherthese opportunities were affecting student learning from the perspective of the teacher. Thisevaluation provided an in depth look at teachers views of the professional learningopportunities on Differentiation in the classroom. Data collection was both qualitative andquantitative, gathered through a single survey and a focus group. The data that wascollected will be used to possible guide the next year of implementation of the FDAinitiative.The initiative of differentiation is important to the growth of the student as a 21 stcentury learner. Through differentiation, Seitsinger (2005) believes that standards-basedinstruction can be very successful. Many times, teachers feel that the standards-basedclassroom is just a class that is teaching to the test; the test being the Criterion ReferencedCompetency Test. Seitsinger (2005) believes that a standards-based classroom that usesdifferentiation and service-learning opportunities shows a more successful studentpopulation in data gathered. Also, it integrates more than three (3) peer reviewed articlesas background literature. To go along with this, Tovey states, “Future research should

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLrecognize the potential relevance of the gender dimension” in a differentiated classroom.This is something to consider in the future when evaluating more of the differentiatedclassrooms at Winder-Barrow Middle School.Evaluation QuestionsPrimary Questions1.Did the implementation of Professional Development opportunities in the area ofdifferentiation help improve instruction?2.Is the layout of the Professional Development opportunities effective?3.Are the Professional Development opportunities being used in the classroom?Secondary Questions1.How is it affecting student learning?2.What are the challenges that teachers face when implementing differentiation?MethodsParticipants40 of the 50 certified teachers from Winder-Barrow Middle School participated in theevaluation of differentiation. This group of teachers consisted of 6 th, 7th, and 8th gradegeneral education teachers, as well as several connections teachers participated in the focusgroup. The survey that was completed by participants was an anonymous survey.Therefore, I only have gender, age, and grade level data on the participants who werewilling to participate in the focus group.The focus group comprised of six males and ten females. Of the six male participants,two were regular education teachers, two were special education teachers, one was aconnection teacher and one was a paraprofessional. The female participants consisted ofseven regular education teachers, one special education teacher, one gifted teacher and oneadministrative assistant. The age of participants has a range of 26-56.The following is the demographic makeup of the focus group:

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLGrade level taught:Sixth grade: 2Seventh grade: 1Eighth grade: 3All three grades: 2Number of years experience:1-10 years: 511-20 years: 221 years: 1Content Taught*:English/Language Arts: 3Science: 2Math: 1Social Studies: 2All Contents: 1Age:20-29: 130-39: 240-49: 450 : 1*Since teachers were permitted to identify more than one content, totals add to more thaneight.Design and ProceduresThe following activities and procedures are designed to address the primary and secondaryevaluation questions: Erica Boswell and I utilized the same group of people during our evaluation project.Since we used the same people, we combined our resources and sent out one surveythat comprised of both my evaluation questions as well as Mrs. Boswell’s questions.We also the same people by completing one combined focus group. Our intentionwas to lessen the burden on our colleagues through the combination of our surveysand focus group. The evaluation questions that were answered through teachers completing oursurvey. The survey asked a series of questions that allowed the teacher to rate his orher feelings on the implementation of differentiation as part of the county Feedback– Differentiation – Assessment initiative. Teachers rated the implementation process,rated the administration’s support of the program and completed open-endedquestions that will gather data on their view of the Professional Developmentopportunities in the area of Differentiation. The evaluator used the results of these initial surveys to create questions (AppendixB) intended to direct conversation of the focus group. The focus group consisted ofteachers from different content areas and grade levels.

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOL The data was then analyzed and made available to the client.Instruments Qualitative and Quantitative Survey: The evaluator created a survey that gatheredboth qualitative and quantitative data for the evaluation. The survey questions werealigned with the evaluation questions, both primary and secondary. Focus Groups: Teachers who asked to participate in focus group from the originalsurvey met to discuss findings gathered from the survey. The focus group consistedof teachers from different contents, grade levels, and experience in teaching.Summary of Key FindingsEvaluation Question 1: Did the implementation of Professional Development opportunities inthe area of differentiation help improve instruction?Key Findings: According to the survey, most teachers felt that the implementation ofProfessional Development opportunities in the area of differentiation has improved theirinstruction by being evident in students learning (See Figure 1). According to the data, 63%of the faculty members that completed the survey felt that the implementation had helpedlearning and instruction in their classroom.Teachers that participated in the focus group reiterated this finding, while adding anexception. They felt that based on the opportunities provided by the administration, theywere able to use the Professional Development and improve instruction in their classrooms.However, they felt that much more Professional Development was needed. This reoccurringtheme was found throughout the group discussion.The teachers felt that there was not enough Professional Development ondifferentiation this school year. According to Goodnough (2006) in Teaching HigherEducation, “The adoption and fine-tuning of PBL or any new instructional approach will onlyoccur if faculties are willing to engage in critical, systematic reflection through self-study”.Learning about how to incorporate differentiation into your classroom through ProfessionalDevelopment is the most basic way to achieve this successfully.

DIFFERENTIATION AT WINDER-BARROW MIDDLE SCHOOLFigure 1Evaluation Question 2: Is the layout of the Professional Development opportunitieseffective?Key Findings: This question can be answered by analyzing the data from the questions, howwould you rate the knowledge of you current students? The teachers that participated in thesurvey said that is a close split between the students doing better and the students doingworse. When we discussed this with the teachers that participated in the focus group, theytended to answer this question by suggesting other options for professional development sothat all teachers would feel comfortable with the format and therefore it would be morereflected in the student achievement. The focus group members suggested an online formatoption and differentiation examples broken down by content and/or grade level.In the article Cognitive Differentiation and Organizational Influence Tactics: Findingsand Implications for Leaders as Agents of Influence, Akos and Cockman (2007) suggest thatdifferent tactics of delivery are useful when trying to implement new differentiationstrategies. The different ideas that are put together by the focus group can help direct thefuture Professional Development opportunities in differentiation across the board.Figure 2