Assessing Differentiation in All Phases of Teaching: the ADAPT instrument

ADAPT 1 ADAPT 2 Authors: Dr. Trynke Keuning, Hogeschool KPZ ([email protected]) Dr. Marieke van Geel, University of Twente ([email protected]) Dr. Marjoleine Dobbelaer, HAN University of Applied Sciences ([email protected]) This work was supported by the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek [grant number 405-15-733]. The translation of the ADAPT instrument was funded by ELAN, Department of Teacher Development, University of Twente, The Netherlands. We highly welcome researchers and institutions around the world to collaborate with us and work with the ADAPT instrument. Please do not hesitate to contact us for more information about the use of ADAPT and possible (inter)national collaborations. ADAPT May 2022 This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 licence. This license allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. To cite the ADAPT instrument please use the following reference: Keuning, T., Van Geel, M., Dobbelaer, M., (2022). ADAPT: Assessing Differentiation in All Phasses of Teaching. Enschede: University of Twente ADAPT 3 Introduction The aim of differentiated instruction is to adapt education to the The aim of differentiated instruction is to adapt education to the students’ diverse educational needs (e.g. Deunk et al, 2015), mostly students’ diverse educational needs (e.g. Deunk et al, 2015), mostly their current level of knowledge and skills (Tomlinson et al., 2003). their current level of knowledge and skills (Tomlinson et al., 2003). Roy et al. (2013, p. 1187) define differentiation as: “an approach by Roy et al. (2013, p. 1187) define differentiation as: “an approach by which teaching is varied and adapted to match students’ abilities using which teaching is varied and adapted to match students’ abilities using systematic procedures for academic progress monitoring and data-systematic procedures for academic progress monitoring and databased decisionmaking.” based decisionmaking.” Providing education that matches students’ needs can be considered Providing education that matches students’ needs can be considered “a cornerstone of effective instruction” (Parsons et al., 2017), but for “a cornerstone of effective instruction” (Parsons et al., 2017), but for successful implementation of differentiation, teachers need a broad successful implementation of differentiation, teachers need a broad range of skills and underlying knowledge (Van Geel et al., 2019). range of skills and underlying knowledge (Van Geel et al., 2019). Based on a cognitive task analysis, Keuning and Van Geel (2021) not Based on a cognitive task analysis, Keuning and Van Geel (2021) not only distinguished four phases in which teachers prepare and perform only distinguished four phases in which teachers prepare and perform differentiated instruction (1. prepare a period and module, 2. prepare differentiated instruction (1. prepare a period and module, 2. prepare a lesson, 3. perform a lesson, and 4. evaluate the lesson), but also a lesson, 3. perform a lesson, and 4. evaluate the lesson), but also identified five underlying principles for differentiation, that should be identified five underlying principles for differentiation, that should be leading teachers’ instructional decisions: 1) strong goal-orientation, leading teachers’ instructional decisions: 1) strong goal-orientation, 2) continuously monitor students’ progress and understanding, 3) 2) continuously monitor students’ progress and understanding, 3) challenge all students, 4) adapt instructions and exercises in order challenge all students, 4) adapt instructions and exercises in order to match students’ needs, and 5) stimulate students’ self-regulation to match students’ needs, and 5) stimulate students’ self-regulation (Keuning & Van Geel, 2021). (Keuning & Van Geel, 2021). Because three out of four phases take place outside the classroom, Because three out of four phases take place outside the classroom, and due to the importance of the cognitive aspect of differentiated and due to the importance of the cognitive aspect of differentiated instruction (teachers need to make deliberate instructional decisions, instruction (teachers need to make deliberate instructional decisions, prior to and during the lesson), Van Geel et al. (2019) concluded that prior to and during the lesson), Van Geel et al. (2019) concluded that in order to assess the degree and quality of differentiated instruction, in order to assess the degree and quality of differentiated instruction, a classroom observation would not suffice. The ADAPT-instrument was a classroom observation would not suffice. The ADAPT-instrument was developed: Assessing Differentiation in All Phases of Teaching (Keuning developed: Assessing Differentiation in All Phases of Teaching (Keuning et al., 2020) in which 23 indicators are scored based on a classroom et al., 2020) in which 23 indicators are scored based on a classroom observation, combined with an interview with the teacher.observation, combined with an interview with the teacher. In Table 1 an overview of the 23 indicators divided over the 4 phases of In Table 1 an overview of the 23 indicators divided over the 4 phases of differentiation is provided. For each indicator indicated which principle differentiation is provided. For each indicator indicated which principle is involvedis involved Phase Indicator Principle of differentiation 1. Period and module preparation 1.1 Evaluation of student learning achievements • • 1.2 Insight into educational needs • 1.3 Insight into the range of instruction offered • 1.4 Prediction of support needs • • 1.5 Determination of supplementary remedial objectives and approaches • • 1.6 Formulation of supplementary enrichment objectives and compilation of a suitable range of instruction • • • 1.7 Organisation of instructional sessions for groups of students • 1.8 Involvement of students in the objectives and approach • 2. Lesson preparation 2.1 Determination of lesson objectives • 2.2 Composition of instructional groups • • 2.3 Preparation of instruction and processing for the core group • 2.4 Preparation of instruction and processing for the intensive instructional group • • 2.5 Preparation of instruction and processing for the enrichment group • • • 2.6 Preparation of encouragement for self-regulation • 3. Actual teaching 3.1 Sharing of the lesson objective • 3.2 Activation and inventory of prior knowledge • 3.3 Provision of didactically sound and purposive core instruction • 3.4 Monitoring of comprehension and the working process • 3.5 Instruction and processing for the intensive group in the lesson • • • 3.6 Challenging the enrichment group in the lesson • • 3.7 Encouragement of self-regulation during the lesson • 3.8 Conclusion of the lesson • • 4.Evaluation 4.1 Evalueren en vervolgacties bepalen • • • 1.1 Table 1. Overview of all indicators and associated principles ADAPT 4 Guidelines for using ADAPT ADAPT was developed based on scientific insights, and the intention is for ADAPT was developed based on scientific insights, and the intention is for assessors to base their scores as much as possible on these insights, and not assessors to base their scores as much as possible on these insights, and not on personal preferences. Prior to using ADAPT, we recommend studying it on personal preferences. Prior to using ADAPT, we recommend studying it carefully in its entirety and to review and follow the information provided carefully in its entirety and to review and follow the information provided below with regard to the assessment and scoring procedures. below with regard to the assessment and scoring procedures. Assessment procedureAssessment procedure ADAPT is scored according to: a) lesson observation and b) an interview with ADAPT is scored according to: a) lesson observation and b) an interview with the teacher, supported by the examination of relevant documents. The lesson the teacher, supported by the examination of relevant documents. The lesson is observed first, and then the interview is held—either immediately after the is observed first, and then the interview is held—either immediately after the lesson or on the same day after school. This allows the assessor to include lesson or on the same day after school. This allows the assessor to include questions in the interview about what was seen during the lesson. Although questions in the interview about what was seen during the lesson. Although relevant documents can be requested prior to the observation, they are relevant documents can be requested prior to the observation, they are discussed primarily during the interview. discussed primarily during the interview. Lesson observation Lesson observation It is recommended that, prior to the observation, the assessor should briefly It is recommended that, prior to the observation, the assessor should briefly ask the teacher what the lesson is about and be given a copy of the method ask the teacher what the lesson is about and be given a copy of the method manual and/or the student materials. manual and/or the student materials. The assessor observes a complete lesson in which instruction is provided to The assessor observes a complete lesson in which instruction is provided to students, either to the class as a whole or otherwise. The assessor should students, either to the class as a whole or otherwise. The assessor should disturb the lesson as little as possible by observing from a fixed place in the disturb the lesson as little as possible by observing from a fixed place in the classroom and not seeking to interact with the students. During the lesson, classroom and not seeking to interact with the students. During the lesson, the assessor takes notes in the space provided on the scoring form and/or on the assessor takes notes in the space provided on the scoring form and/or on specific indicators in order to substantiate the scores. The assessor does not specific indicators in order to substantiate the scores. The assessor does not assign any scores during the lesson. assign any scores during the lesson. Use of video Use of video Video recordings can be used as an alternative to in-person observation. The Video recordings can be used as an alternative to in-person observation. The following points are important in this regard:following points are important in this regard: If possible, two cameras should be used: one camera focused on the teacher If possible, two cameras should be used: one camera focused on the teacher (in front of the classroom) and one camera focused on the students. (in front of the classroom) and one camera focused on the students. The teacher should wear a microphone, so that individual instruction and The teacher should wear a microphone, so that individual instruction and instruction provided to smaller groups of students will also be clearly audible. instruction provided to smaller groups of students will also be clearly audible. Interview In the interview, the assessor collects all of the information needed to complete ADAPT as a whole from the indicators relating to the preparation of the period, the preparation and evaluation of the lesson, and the observed lesson. During the interview, the teacher may talk about relevant documents that support their narrative (for example a group plan, module preparation or lesson preparation). To obtain a good overview of these documents, the assessor should ask the teacher to show these during the interview. This specifically refers to the relevant documents associated with the observed lesson. Scoring procedure At the end of the lesson observation (after the lesson and outside the classroom), the component relating to actual teaching is scored as far as possible, so that it is clear which information for this component has yet to be retrieved in the interview. After the interview, the other indicators are scored as well, and the scores and justification for actual teaching are adjusted and/or supplemented as needed, based on information from the interview. All indicators are scored. If an assessment is not possible due to the lack of information, the score ‘Cannot be assessed’ is assigned. In a few cases, an option of ‘Not applicable’ is available. When scoring, the assessor always uses the comprehensive scoring information for each indicator. Providing justification for a score is mandatory, thereby ensuring that the assessor can properly consider and substantiate the assessment. The justification helps the teacher to understand why a certain score has been assigned, and it is therefore important when giving feedback. The following points are important when conducting an assessment with ADAPT: • The guidance of students with a personal learning pathway (PLP) is not included in the assessment. • The assessor chooses the most appropriate score based on the descriptions. The descriptions of the scores may not be entirely applicable ADAPT 5 to the situation in the teacher’s classroom. In such cases, the assessor chooses the most appropriate score and justifies the choice. • In case of doubt between two scores, the assessor assigns the lowest score: if a teacher meets the description for a score of 3 and it is unclear whether the teacher meets the description for a score of 4 (for example because this was not discussed during the interview), a score of 3 is assigned (the same applies for scores of 1/2 and 2/3). • The assessor scores what the teacher does in the situation observed: the teacher’s differentiation skills during the lesson and how the teacher prepared the lesson and period. Although teachers are quite likely to indicate that they normally do things differently, this is not relevant to this assessment. • The assessor scores the indicators as fairly and objectively as possible, using the information that is available. The assessor should not make such assumptions as, ‘based on what I have seen, I expect that the teacher would also do XX’. • The assessor evaluates the indicators separately and includes in the assessment only information that is relevant to the indicator in question. • If a teacher has a combined class and would not receive the same score for both groups (for example the teacher takes inventory of prior knowledge for Year 5 students, but not for Year 6 students), the assessor retains the highest score. The assessor notes in the justification for a score that this was not seen in the other group. References Deunk, M., Doolaard, S., Smale-Jacobse, A., & Bosker, R. J. (2015). Differentiation within and across classrooms: A systematic review of studies into the cognitive effects of differentiation practices. Groningen: GION onderwijs/onderzoek. Keuning, T., Van Geel, M., Dobbelaer, M. & Van Oudheusden, S. (2020). Assessing differentiation in all phases of teaching (ADAPT). https://www. matchproject.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/ADAPT-Handleiding-cDecember-2020.pdf Keuning, T. & Van Geel, M. (2021). Differentiated Teaching with Adaptive Learning Systems and Teacher Dashboards: The Teacher Still Matters Most. IEEE transactions on learning technologies, 14(2), 201-210. https://doi. org/10.1109/TLT.2021.3072143 Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., Allen, M. (2018). Teachers’ instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 205–242. doi:10.3102/0034654317743198 Roy, A., Guay, F., & Valois, P. (2013). Teaching to address diverse learning needs: Development and validation of a Differentiated Instruction Scale. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(11), 1186–1204. https://doi. org/10.1080/13603116.2012.743604 Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2–3), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320302700203 Van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Frèrejean, J., Dolmans, D., Van Merriënboer, J., & Visscher, A. J. (2019) Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(1), 51-67. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/09243453.2018.1539013 ADAPT 6 ADAPT 7 Period and module preparation The first phase in the process of differentiation is the preparation of periods and modules. The teacher prepares a period of several lessons (for example a week, module or teaching period). In the preparation of periods and modules, the teacher analyses the objectives as a whole and determines what is to be taught and assessed at which times. The teacher also charts the starting situations and educational needs of the students. The extent to which a teacher analyses results, sets objectives, has insight into the range of instruction offered and existing educational needs, and determines an appropriate instruction technique during the preparation of periods and modules is measured according to the following indicators: 1.1 Evaluation of student learning achievements 1.2 Insight into educational needs 1.3 Insight into the range of instruction offered 1.4 Prediction of support needs 1.5 Determination of supplementary remedial objectives and approaches 1.6 Formulation of supplementary enrichment objectives and compilation of a suitable range of instruction 1.7 Organisation of instructional sessions for groups of students 1.8 Involvement of students in the objectives and approach ADAPT 8 Evaluation of student learning achievements This indicator is used to score the extent to which the teacher evaluates student learning achievements. Information on student learning achievements can be obtained according to a variety of sources, including observations, daily work (digital or hard copy) and test scores. Test scores can be obtained for various types of tests (for example in the student monitoring system or the digital or other method). This could also include scores on shadow tests. For a high score on this indicator, teachers must also relate the scores of individual students to substantive objectives and determine why the objectives have been met, have been met only in part or have not been met. To this end, the teacher uses multiple sources of information. 1.1 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher: • does not consider student learning achievements. • The teacher did not take time to evaluate student learning achievements. • The teacher deliberately does not consider the student learning achievements from the previous year, in order to form a current image of the students. 2The teacher: • considers student learning achievements. The student learning achievements and/ or the levels emerging from them are determined for information purposes. The teacher considers whether these achievements meet expectations in broad terms. • The teacher has considered the scores, but has no overview of where students are failing within each domain. • The teacher scrolls through the student learning achievements from the previous period on the dashboard of the adaptive software. 3 The teacher: • considers individual student learning achievements; • relates the scores to the substantive objectives and uses this information to determine whether the substantive objectives have been met, have been met only in part or have not been met. Based on the tests, the teacher knows which students have not met specific objectives in the previous period. • The teacher considers how many errors a student has made in each domain (and sub-domain). • The teacher administers a shadow test in order to know which students have already mastered certain lesson objectives. 4 The teacher: • considers individual student learning achievements; • relates the scores to the substantive objectives and uses this information to determine whether the substantive objectives have been met, have been met only in part or have not been met; • determines why the objectives have been met, have been met only in part or have not been met. The teacher does this by combining a variety of sources of information. The teacher seeks an explanation for why the substantive objectives have or have not been met. The teacher investigates where students have gaps. Various sources of information could include students’ work, diagnostic interviews, other tests or the dashboard of the adaptive software. • The teacher considers the students’ work to determine why students did not meet the objectives from the previous period on the test. • The teacher consults the adaptive software dashboard to identify the learning objectives that individual students are failing to meet, in addition to reviewing their work on note pads to determine why they are failing to meet these objectives. Cannot be assessed There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher evaluates student learning achievements. ADAPT 9 Insight into educational needs This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher has insight into the general pedagogical and subjectspecific educational needs of students. This overview can be obtained in a variety of ways (for example by observing students during class or by conducting diagnostic interviews with students). General educational needs often extend beyond the boundaries of specific subjects, and they are often related to the general learning process and/or social-emotional needs of individual students. For example, a student with a short attention span might need additional encouragement. Subject-specific educational needs are related to the needs that students have with regard to specific subjects. These needs involve the instruction and guidance that individual students need in order to meet some or all of the objectives for specific subjects. For example, a student could have a need for concrete materials, while the rest of the class is no longer working with such materials. A high score on this indicator is assigned to teachers who have insight into both the general and the subject-specific educational needs of the students and who also document this information. 1.2 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher has no insight into the educational needs of students. • The teacher would like to get to know the students personally at the beginning of the year and therefore does not use the insights of teachers from the previous school year. 2The teacher has insight into the general pedagogical or subject-specific needs of students. • The teacher has selected a number of students who have not yet memorised the multiplication tables and who are therefore allowed to work with a chart for larger multiplication problems, but has no insight into pedagogical needs. • There is a group plan containing the general pedagogical needs. Arithmetic teaching needs have not been charted. 3 The teacher has insight into the general pedagogical and subject-specific needs of students. This information is documented only in part, if at all. • The teacher considers how many errors a student has made in each domain (and sub-domain). • The teacher administers a shadow test in order to know which students have already mastered certain lesson objectives. 4 The teacher has insight into the general pedagogical and subject-specific needs of students. Both types of needs are documented. The teacher records this overview so that it can be consulted by others. • The teacher has a group plan containing descriptions of both social-emotional needs and teaching/educational needs for the core subjects. • The teacher has a general group overview of general needs. In addition, the teacher prepares the period and charts the students who have specific arithmetic teaching needs. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher has insight into the educational needs of students. ADAPT 16 ADAPT 17 Lesson preparation The second phase in the process of differentiation is the preparation of lessons. The teacher determines the lesson objective and charts educational needs with regard to this objective. The teacher uses this information to prepare instruction that will allow the groups of students that have been composed to meet the formulated objectives. The extent to which teachers demonstrate the skills associated with this phase is measured according to the following indicators: 2.1 Determination of lesson objectives 2.2 Composition of instructional groups 2.3 Preparation of instruction and processing for the core group 2.4 Preparation of instruction and processing for the intensive instructional group 2.5 Preparation of instruction and processing for the enrichment group 2.6 Preparation of encouragement for self-regulation ADAPT 18 Determination of lesson objectives This indicator is used to measure whether the teacher determines the lesson objective for the entire group. It thus refers to objectives that apply to all students. The teacher does not simply take the objectives from the method/software at face value, but verifies whether they have been formulated in such a way that it is clear what the students are going to learn, and not what they are going to do (activity). The teacher also examines whether the objectives are comprehensible to the students. If they are not, the teacher reformulates the objectives. For a high score on this indicator, teachers must position the objectives within the complete course of learning. 2.1 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher does not determine the objective of the lesson prior to the start of the lesson. • While a student hands out the workbooks, the teacher decides what the objective of the lesson will be. • The teacher opens the dashboard right before the start of the arithmetic lesson to see what the lesson is about. 2The teacher: • develops an image of the lesson objective. The teacher takes the objectives at face value. • The teacher reads the lesson objectives in advance. 3 The teacher: • develops an image of the lesson objective; • considers the lesson objective critically, adjusting it as needed. The teacher ensures that the lesson objective meets the following two characteristics: • the objective describes the subject matter (new or review) to be taught: what students are going to learn. A good objective thus does not merely describe what the lesson is about (the topic) and/ or what the students are going to do in the lesson (activity) • the objective is comprehensible to the students. • The teacher considers the objective (‘calculating area’) in the adaptive software and formulates (or reformulates) it as an ‘I can’ statement. ‘I can calculate the area of rectangles’. 4 The teacher: • develops an image of the lesson objective; • considers the lesson objective critically, adjusting it as needed. • has an image of the coherence between the lesson objective and related objectives occurring earlier and later in the course of learning. • The teacher has set a concrete objective and knows that this objective was addressed for the first time earlier in the week by the team-teaching partner. • The teacher determines that the objective is wellformulated and exactly what the students should be able to do at the end of the lesson. The teacher is aware that the students should have completely mastered this objective at the end of the module, as a prerequisite for the next module. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher has determined the objective of the lesson in advance. ADAPT 19 Composition of instructional groups This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher composes instructional groups for a particular lesson. To receive a high score on this indicator, teachers must search for the most efficient grouping for specific lesson objectives, thereby meeting the needs of all students. In this regard, there is no set number of instructional groups. 2.2 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher does not consider the composition of instructional groups. • The teacher provides standard instruction to the entire group and then identifies which students have questions. 2 The teacher uses the instructional groups that were composed earlier or that were created by the software without any further consideration. For example, previously created instructional groups might be included in the preparation of a period or a group plan. • When preparing a lesson, the teacher does not consider the composition of instructional groups, because the adaptive software suggests extended instructional groups during the lesson. 3 The teacher critically examines the needs of some students with regard to the lesson objective and uses this information to compose instructional groups (but not a fixed number). In this regard, a teacher may deviate from the usual number of instructional groups from the period preparation or school-wide agreements, although this is not required. • The teacher determines that the three instructional groups from the group plan indeed constitute the best number for this lesson objective. In addition, in the period preparation, the teacher had already noted that two students who are normally in the core group will probably need extended instruction in this lesson. Based on the previous two lessons, the teacher considers this a realistic estimate, and keeps it that way. • The teacher determines which students have already met the lesson objective and may thus skip the plenary class instruction. The teacher does not also identify students who need extended instruction, but uses the extended instruction group from the group plan. 4 The teacher critically examines the needs of all students with regard to the lesson objective, and uses this information to compose instructional groups (but not a fixed number). In this regard, a teacher may deviate from the usual number of instructional groups from the period preparation or school-wide agreements, although this is not required. • The teacher determines that the three instructional groups from the group plan indeed constitute the best number for this lesson objective, but also notes that two students who would normally be in the core group will probably need extended instruction for this lesson. In addition, the teacher establishes that a student who usually follows extended instruction has already mastered this objective reasonably well, and determines that this student may choose during the lesson whether to start working independently right away. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher considers the composition of instructional groups when preparing the lesson. ADAPT 20 Preparation of instruction and processing for the core group This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher prepares the instruction and processing for the core group by critically examining the suggestions in the method. A teacher can adjust the proposed instruction and processing based on practical considerations or according to the educational needs of the students. For example, if a choice has been made to use other materials for processing (for example pancakes instead of fraction cards), it must be for an educational or didactic reason. For a high score on this indicator, teachers do not necessarily have to adjust the instruction and processing. The important point is for them to consider the suggestions from the method: whether the suggestions are suited to the core group. In this regard, the instruction is more important than the processing. For this reason, considering only the instruction is sufficient for a score of 3. This indicator does not concern the supplementary instruction and processing provided to the intensive group or the enrichment group. 2.3 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1 The teacher does not critically examine the suggestions from the method with regard to the instruction and/or processing for the core group. • The teacher provides the instruction as suggested by the adaptive software or method manual, without further consideration of whether this is appropriate. 2 The teacher critically examines the suggestions from the method with regard to the instruction and/or the processing (or the amount thereof) for the core group. The teacher adjusts this as needed based on practical considerations or in order to make it more enjoyable. These considerations are explicitly practical (for example time, space or available materials). This can also be done in order to make the teaching more enjoyable or attractive. • The teacher chooses to have all students skip Assignment 3, as they would each need a mirror for this and not enough of them are available. 3 The teacher critically examines the suggestions from the method with regard to the instruction for the core group. The teacher adjusts this as needed based on the educational needs of the students. This requires a critical examination of the method. It may not be necessary to do anything other than what the method suggests. • The teacher decides it would be better to shorten the instruction, as the students have picked up the material well in a previous lesson on this objective. The teacher does not consider adjusting the processing associated with this lesson. 4 The teacher critically examines the suggestions from the method with regard to the instruction and the processing (or the amount thereof) for the core group. The teacher adjusts this as needed based on the educational needs of the students. This requires a critical examination of the method. It may not be necessary to do anything other than what the method suggests. • The teacher shortens the instruction, but deliberately has the students complete all of the processing assignments. Although the students already understand the material, they need more practice with it. • The teacher follows the instruction suggested in the method manual, as it seems well suited to the level of the students. The teacher eliminates the Assignment 3, because it does not correspond to the lesson objective. Instead of this assignment, the teacher provides an alternative assignment that does correspond to the objective. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher considers the instruction and processing for the core group. ADAPT 21 Preparation of instruction and processing for the intensive instructional group This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher prepares the instruction and processing for students for whom the core instruction is not sufficient to meet the lesson objective. This applies to students who are having trouble with the specific lesson objective and who thus need additional attention in order to meet this lesson objective. The composition of this group can thus differ from one lesson to another. Additional instruction for these students could took place during extended instruction or pre-teaching. To receive a high score on this indicator, teachers must have explicitly prepared this instruction and processing, they must not repeat what was done in the plenary class instruction and they must have considered the balance between processing and instruction time. This indicator concerns instruction and processing for the intensive instructional group with regard to the regular lesson objective, and not the remedial objectives that have been addressed previously. 2.4 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher does not consider instruction or processing for the intensive instructional group. • The teacher follows the instruction for students who are weaker in arithmetic as presented in the method manual, without considering its relative suitability. • The teacher does not prepare the instruction for students who are weaker in arithmetic, but allows it to depend on reactions to the instruction provided during class. 2 The teacher considers the instruction and/or processing for the intensive instruction group in advance, but does not focus on meeting the lesson objective. The lesson is taught only at a level lower than the lesson objective, meaning that students may not have met the regular lesson objective by the end of the lesson. • The teacher allows students to work only in the supplementary workbook, as it is better suited to their level (the teacher is not aware that they are not meeting the lesson objective by doing so). 3 The teacher considers the instruction for the intensive instructional group in advance and, in the process, focuses on meeting the lesson objective. It is important for the teacher to have a clear image of how to ensure that the students in the intensive instructional group are also able to meet the regular lesson objective. • The teacher has decided to provide students who are weak in arithmetic with extended instruction using concrete material, following the core instruction. The teacher uses the supplementary workbook during the guided practice, but then also has the students complete exercises from the regular workbook, so that they will also be completing exercises at the level of the regular lesson objective. The teacher does not consider the quantity of tasks in relation to the time that students have available for processing. 4 The teacher considers the instruction and processing (or the amount thereof) for the intensive instructional group in advance and, in the process, focuses on meeting the lesson objective. For a score of 4 on this indicator, teachers must consider the balance between instruction and processing. • The teacher has decided to provide pre-teaching instruction using concrete material. In addition, after the core instruction, the teacher uses the supplementary workbook for guided practice and selects a number of exercises from the regular workbook so that the students will also complete exercises at the level of the regular lesson objective. The total amount of processing exercises is feasible for the students within the arithmetic lesson. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher considers the instruction and processing for the intensive instructional group. ADAPT 22 Preparation of instruction and processing for the enrichment group This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher prepares the instruction and processing for the enrichment group. These are students who have already met or can meet the objective of the current lesson without or after very limited instruction from the teacher.The composition of this group can thus differ from one lesson to another. Teachers will receive a high score on this indicator if they have compacted the core instruction and processing for these students and have selected enriching (in depth or breadth) processing material that corresponds to the lesson objective or that demonstrably corresponds to the individual objectives of the students. In this regard, the teacher should actually study the material in order to know what these students are working on. For a maximum score, the teacher must have determined in advance how the enrichment group will be involved at their own level in the various components of plenary class instruction (e.g. introduction, instruction or conclusion). 2.5 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1 The teacher does not consider instruction and processing for the enrichment group and/or selects the enriching processing material that students in the enrichment group will complete.This material does not necessarily correspond to the lesson objective and/or the individual objectives of students. 2 The teacher: • determines which part of the core instruction the enrichment group should follow and selects which core processing these students should complete (compacting); • selects which enriching processing material the students in the enrichment group will complete. This material does not necessarily correspond to the lesson objective and/or the individual objectives of students. The teacher follows the method suggestions for compacting the core processing. The enriching (in depth or breadth) material serves more to keep students busy than it does to contribute to meeting learning objectives. The teacher has little or no insight into what the students should do for the enriching processing material. • Stronger students work in their supplementary bonus method when they have completed the processing, and the teacher has no overview of the exercises that they must complete. • The teacher decides that the stronger students may work on the computer when they have completed the processing, but does not specify what they should do. 3 The teacher: • determines which part of the core instruction the enrichment group should follow and selects which core processing these students should complete (compacting); • selects enriching processing material that the students in the enrichment group will complete. This material corresponds to the lesson objective and/or the individual objectives of students. • The teacher makes sure to stay abreast of the exercises on which these students will be working. • The teacher develops several supplementary challenging assignments for the stronger students that are related to the lesson objective. • The teacher has decided that students can start working on the assignments in the work package more quickly in the adaptive software. This allows them to work towards individual learning objectives. • Stronger students work in their supplementary bonus method when they have completed the regular processing. The teacher has selected exercises that correspond to the lesson objective. 4 The teacher: • determines which part of the core instruction the enrichment group should follow and selects which core processing these students should complete (compacting); • selects enriching processing material that the students in the enrichment group will complete. This material corresponds to the lesson objective and/or the individual objectives of students; • The teacher makes sure to stay abreast of the exercises on which these students will be working; • The teacher determines how the enrichment group will be involved at their own level in the various components of plenary class instruction (e.g. introduction, instruction or conclusion). • The teacher prepares a number of advanced questions that will be presented during the core instruction to students who are stronger in arithmetic. • The teacher seeks a connection between core and advanced exercises, in order to ask further questions about them at the end of the lesson. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher considers the instruction and processing for the enrichment group. N/A There is no enrichment group for the lesson objective. ADAPT 23 Preparation of encouragement for self-regulation This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher plans the choices that students will have in the upcoming lesson with regard to their own approach (with the goal of encouraging self-regulation). To receive a high score on this indicator, teachers must plan choices for students, while also retaining control by setting limits to the freedom of choice for some or all students. 2.6 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher does not prepare the choices to be presented to students. • The teacher considers the students not yet independent enough to make their own choices. 2 The teacher: • prepares what the students will be able to choose for themselves, but students have no influence on the approach to and/or the achievement of the learning objectives. Influence on the approach could include planning for oneself, following or not following instructions, or choosing whether to collaborate and which processing to do. • All of the students must solve Problems 1–3, and they may decide for themselves the order in which they will solve them. • For Problem 3, all students may always choose which two rows they will complete. • The teacher assigns a weekly task, but it already contains what must be done and when (it is more like a calendar/ schedule). In principle, every student should be able to complete the tasks for that day within the lesson. 3 The teacher: • prepares what the students will be able to choose for themselves, and some or all of the students thus have (or have had) an influence on the approach to and/or the achievement of the learning objectives. • The teacher has decided in advance to allow students to choose whether they do or do not wish to participate in the instruction. • The teacher assigns a weekly task. Students are responsible for the scheduling and completion of the assignments. During the week, ‘weekly task time’ is scheduled, in which students are free to decide what they will work on and when. 4 The teacher: • prepares what the students will be able to choose for themselves, and some or all of the students thus have (or have had) an influence on the approach to and/or the achievement of the learning objectives; • has considered the limits (if any) and guidance that students will need during the lesson. The teacher considers in advance the limits to be placed on the freedom of choice that individual students will have. For example, some students will not be allowed to start working independently before the core instruction. • The teacher has decided in advance to allow students to choose whether they do or do not wish to participate in the instruction. The teacher has also decided which students will be given complete freedom and which students will receive guidance when they have made the ‘wrong choice’. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher prepares the choices to be presented to students. ADAPT 24 ADAPT 25 Actual teaching The third phase in the process of differentiation is the actual teaching. During the actual teaching, the teacher introduces the lesson, provides differentiated instruction, promotes self-regulation and then concludes the lesson. The extent to which teachers demonstrate the skills associated with this phase is measured according to the following indicators: 3.1 Sharing of the lesson objective 3.2 Activation and inventory of prior knowledge 3.3 Provision of didactically sound and purposive core instruction 3.4 Monitoring of comprehension and the working process 3.5 Instruction and processing for the intensive group in the lesson 3.6 Challenging the enrichment group in the lesson 3.7 Encouragement of self-regulation during the lesson 3.8 Conclusion of the lesson ADAPT 32 Encouragement of self-regulation during the lesson This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher encourages students (or groups of students) in the regulation of their own learning processes. To receive a high score on this indicator, teachers must do this at different times and in different ways, in addition to monitoring and, if deemed necessary, intervening. The following are examples of different ways of encouraging self-regulation during the lesson: • Having students determine where they stand with regard to the objective; • Allowing students to choose for themselves whether they will participate in the instruction; • Providing students with choices during processing; • Allowing students to choose the final product themselves; • Having students engage in conscious reflection during the lesson; • Having students engage in conscious evaluation after the lesson. 3.7 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1The teacher provides either no choice or no meaningful choice to the group or to individual students. A meaningful choice means that the teacher provides students with a choice related to meeting the lesson objective. The teacher encourages the students to think about what they need in order to achieve the objective. • The students are free to choose the order in which they will solve the problems. 2 The teacher provides one or more meaningful choices to the group or to individual students. The teacher does not monitor. The teacher provides one or more meaningful choices to the group or to individual students. The teacher does not monitor. • The teacher has multiple types of processing or instructional groups, and the students are free to make their own choices in this regard. The teacher has no overview of the students’ choices. 3 The teacher provides choices to the group or to individual students in a single, specific manner. In addition, the teacher monitors these choices, intervening as needed. A single, specific manner means that the teacher can provide choices at different times, but that it is always the same type of choice. One example could be the choice of whether or not to follow the explanation. Intervention means that the teacher has the students reconsider their choices or makes the choices for them. • After providing the core instruction, the teacher allows the students to decide for themselves whether they wish to participate in the extended instruction. In this regard, the teacher maintains an overview of whether certain students do indeed sign up for the instruction. If they do not do this, the teacher briefly checks whether the students truly do already understand the material. • Once students have made the choice to complete an enrichment assignment, the teacher monitors whether this choice was appropriate. The teacher discusses with the students whether the assignment was indeed sufficiently challenging. If the students report that it was not, the teacher asks them what they will choose next time in order to ensure that it is sufficiently challenging. 4 The teacher provides meaningful choices to the group or individual students in multiple ways. In addition, the teacher monitors these choices, intervening as needed. For a high score on this indicator, teachers must demonstrate that they have a broad repertoire of self-regulation activities and that they apply them in multiple ways during the lesson. • In addition to having the students consider whether they do or do not wish to follow the instruction, the teacher allows them to choose which processing exercises they wish to complete. In this regard, the teacher encourages the students to choose the five exercises that they find most difficult. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether the teacher provides meaningful choices to the group or to individual students. ADAPT 33 Conclusion of the lesson This indicator is used to measure the extent to which the teacher concludes the lesson. At the end of the lesson, the teacher engages in evaluation with all students with regard to whether they have achieved the lesson objective. For a high score on this indicator, teachers must involve all students in the evaluation of the lesson objective during the conclusion of the lesson. It is not necessary for all students to have answered the question, but all students must be activated. To achieve the maximum score on this indicator, teachers must check to ensure that the students have arrived at the correct answer, as well as to ensure that they have properly understood the strategy being taught and that they have understood what they were doing. 3.8 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1 The teacher does not devote any attention to the conclusion of the lesson in order to determine whether the objective has been met. • While the students are still working on the processing, the bell sounds and the arithmetic lesson is over. • The teacher says, ‘Everybody, close your books. Now we’re going to do spelling’. 2 • The teacher concludes the lesson, but does not do much of anything to involve students in the conclusion of the lesson; or • The teacher discusses (either with or without students) the process (working attitude) and/or the product (completed work) of the students. The conclusion of the lesson does not focus on determining whether the objective of the lesson has been met by all students; or • The teacher meets all of the conditions for a score of 3 or 4, but only a few students are involved in this. If the teacher only discusses the working process or the product (e.g. the number of wrong answers on the exercises), this does not automatically mean that the students have met the objective. • The teacher asks, ‘How was it?’ and has one or two students answer. • The teacher says, ‘You all did great!’ or, ‘Good job! Next time, Year 5 could be a bit quieter when Year 6 is having instruction’. • The teacher repeats what they have done this lesson, but does not involve the students. • The teacher asks one student to tell how the problems could be solved. • The teacher asks the students how many exercises they have gotten wrong during the processing. 3 At the end of the lesson, the teacher engages in evaluation with all students concerning whether they have met the objective by checking whether the students are now able to give the right answer. At the end of the lesson, the teacher checks whether students are now able to do it (answer check). It is still unclear whether the students have used the right strategy or whether they actually understand the material and are not simply applying a trick. • At the end of the lesson, the teacher has all students solve three problems on erasable boards and checks whether the answers are correct. • The teacher quizzes the students and only looks at the correct answers. • The teacher writes two problems on the board and has all students think about them. The teacher then asks two students for the answers. 4 At the end of the lesson, the teacher engages in evaluation with all students concerning whether they have met the objective by checking whether the students actually understand what has been taught. At the end of the lesson, the teacher checks whether the students now understand the material (strategy check). This is actually more about the ‘how’ question: the strategy. The teacher evaluates whether the objective has been met (for example by solving a problem together or by having the students express their solution strategies). Although it is not necessary for all students to have a turn to speak, they are all encouraged to think about it. • At the end of the lesson, the teacher has all students solve a number of problems with a quiz. The teacher checks which strategies the students are using to solve the problems and repeatedly emphasises the strategy that was central to the lesson. • The teacher writes a few problems on the board and has all students think about them. The teacher asks two students to explain what they have done and what the answers are. The teacher then asks the rest of the class if they have also solved the problems in this way. NEI There is not enough information to determine whether a lesson conclusion has taken place. ADAPT 34 ADAPT 35 Evaluation The fourth and final phase in the process of differentiation is the evaluation that takes place after the lesson. During this phase, the teacher evaluates whether the lesson objective has been met by the students. The extent to which teachers demonstrate the skills associated with this phase is measured according to the following indicator: 4.1 Evaluation and determination of follow-up actions ADAPT 36 Evaluation and determination of follow-up actions The teacher looks back on the lesson, examines the extent to which the lesson objective has been met by all students and whether and, if so, what follow-up actions may be necessary. To achieve a high score on this indicator, teachers must base these follow-up actions on an explanation of whether the objective has or has not been met. 4.1 Score Description Explanatory notes Example 1After the lesson, the teacher does not chart the extent to which the students have met the lesson objective. If a score of 3 or 4 has been assigned for indicator 3.8, a score of 1 is not possible here. • Students must correct their work themselves. This is their own responsibility. The teacher does not examine the results further. 2 The teacher: • charts the extent to which the students have met the lesson objective. The teacher checks only to see which students have met the lesson objective. • At the end of the lesson, the teacher consults the dashboard to see whether all students have completed a sufficient number of exercises correctly. • Students correct their own work. If they have made more than three mistakes, they must note this on the list next to the submission box. The teacher checks this list at the end of the afternoon. 3 The teacher: • charts the extent to which the students have met the lesson objective; • determines whether and, if so, what follow-up actions are needed. Follow-up actions could include: • a brief remedial action that ensures that students still meet the lesson objective (for example an additional instruction session later in the day); • a note regarding the presumed instructional needs of one or more students in a subsequent lesson on the same topic (do/do not allow them to join the extended instruction, pre-teaching, assign bonus exercises). • The teacher notices that a number of students in the core group finished quickly and met the objective quickly as well. The teacher notes that, in the next lesson on this topic, these students could complete some more challenging processing assignments. • One student from the core group had made a lot of mistakes in the work. The teacher requests to meet with this student to explain the assignment again during the weekly task time. • The teacher checks to see which students have still made a lot of mistakes and notes their names in the logbook to ‘keep an eye on them’ during the next lesson on the topic. 4 The teacher: • charts the extent to which the students have met the lesson objective; • the teacher evaluates why the students have/have not met the objective; • the teacher determines whether and, if so, what follow-up actions are needed. The teacher can obtain information about why students have/have not met the objective during the lesson, during the evaluation with students at the end of the lesson or by checking the students’ work after the lesson. The teacher does not necessarily have to be able to provide an explanation, but must be active in searching for an explanation. • The teacher observes that the students who have been working at the instruction table have not met the lesson objective. The teacher notes having remained stuck in the instruction with concrete material for a long time, so that the translation has not yet been made. The teacher decides to pay attention to the abstract representation on the number line in a pre-teaching session before the next lesson on this topic. • One student from the core group had made a lot of mistakes in the work. The teacher requests to meet with this student during the weekly task time to determine what the problem was. The teacher plans further follow-up actions based on this conversation. NEI It is not possible to assess whether the teacher evaluates the objective and whether the teacher evaluates the approach and/or determines follow-up actions.