Differentiation or Adaption?

Exploring these terms as distinctive terms might be helpful before discussing whether educators should be using differentiation, adaption or a mixture of both. A more in-depth exploration can be found here: NEN Summary: Differentiation, NEN Summary: Adaptive teaching and NEN Explain: Differentiation.

Differentiation is a bottom-up approach to supporting individuals as the needs of individuals are catered for before differentiating the needs of the whole class. Meaning that content, processes, practice, and the environment aims to be tailored to the needs of every individual within a classroom. This understanding is further supported by VanTassel-Baska (2012), defined differentiation as the practice of providing different teaching to meet the specific learning needs of each individual within the class.

Adaptive teaching is the opposite. This is where the needs of the whole class are viewed first, and the content, curriculum and products are adapted within this view before focusing on the individual needs of learners. This understanding is further supported by Darrow (2008), who defined Adaptation as any adjustment in the environment and learning materials that enable individuals to engage with and develop an understanding of the learning outcomes on offer.

---

It is the same thing!

Differentiation focuses on differences and splitting learners into groups to accommodate these. Adaptive teaching focuses on accommodating the needs of learners within the overall session. This is a different use of words to describe the same practice. Well, not entirely, as Adaptation is the process of involvement in the same learning outcomes, content and activities. Differentiation, however, can be seen as the practice of providing different outcomes, content, and activities to individuals to ensure they are learning. Now, it could be discussed that this is just differentiation being misused, and that might be correct, but this is the growing understanding of what differentiation is compared to adaptive teaching, and this has been observed as the real-world use of differentiation in the classroom as can be seen in the work for Deunk et. Al (2018). 

Differentiation and adaptive practice are the same things. Some would agree with this statement, and some would argue otherwise. Recently, adaptive teaching has gained more recognition and notoriety within educational pedagogy and consciousness after its inclusion within the Early Career Framework. This framework has attempted to shape the professional understanding of the distinction of what adaptive teaching represents compared to that of differentiation and begins to move educators aware of that and onto adaptive teaching. This enhanced recognition is furthered when Ofsted highlighted that differentiated activities have ‘not been shown to have much impact on pupils’ attainment’; this was informed by research conducted by Deunk et. Al (2018). Deunk et. Al (2018) suggested, among other aspects, that ‘homogenous ability grouping’ had a ‘negative effect on low-ability students.’ This has shaped and informed Oftsed’s understanding of differentiation as a practice that holds different outcomes for individuals based on their unique abilities. However, they require schools to have the same ambitions ‘for almost all learners’. As such, it is unsurprising that The Early Carer Framework views adaptive teaching through a responsive adaption approach, including providing targeted support to struggling pupils to ensure they can meet the same learning outcomes as their peers. 

---

Is differentiation just the lowering of expectations?

The educational consciousness of differentiation from those within and outside of the classroom is growing in agreement with Ofsted and the Department of Education that differentiation is the practice of lowering expectations for individuals in order to meet their needs. This, however, is and has not always been the understanding. For example, The SEND Code of Practice (2015) highlights the need for and importance of differentiation in meeting the needs of individuals with diverse needs and, in doing so, states clearly that high-quality, effective and enabling teaching is that which has been differentiated and personalised to meet the individual needs of the majority of children and young people.

The view that differentiation through providing differentiated teaching activities or resources has generally not been shown to have much impact on pupils’ attainment. This is further supported by the work of Hattie (2009), who discusses that differentiation is among the most ineffective methods of supportive teaching, learning, and assessment practice. On the other hand, adaptive teaching is a responsive approach to meeting the learner’s individual needs while still promoting and holding high expectations from each individual in the classroom. This view is further supported by the Department for Education (2021) within the Teaching Standards, which state that effective and best practices around teaching, learning and assessment pivot around the adaption of teaching to respond to the unique and collective strengths and needs of all individuals within a classroom.  This is also supported by the knowledge of when and how to differentiate to ensure the effectiveness of the content, process, products and learning environment.

However, this view that differentiation enables and promotes the lowering of expectations again comes down to your understanding of differentiation and different practices. If, like the Department of Education and Ofsted, you believe it focuses on providing different learning outcomes for individuals, then it will likely promote lower expectations. However, if you think that adaption is just a rewording of differentiation and that to differentiate, educators should be taking into consideration the environment and materials for learning so that individuals and whole classes are provided with equal opportunity to engage with and develop an understanding of the same learning outcomes then it would not necessarily mean that it enables and promote the lowering of expectations.

Reference

Avery L. D., VanTassel-Baska J. (2002). The impact of gifted education evaluation at state and local levels: Translating results into action. SAGE: Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 153-176.

Deunk, Marjolein I.; Jacobse, Annemieke E.; de Boer, Hester; Doolaard, Simone; Bosker, Roel J. (2018). Effective Differentiation Practices. Available at: https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/56288856/Author_s_version_Effective_Differentiation_Practices.pdf.

Darrow A. (2008). Adaptations in the Classroom: Accommodations and Modifications, Part 2. SAGE: General Music Today, 21(3), 32–34.

Department for Education. (2021). Teachers’ Standards: Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies. Avalible at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1040274/Teachers__Standards_Dec_2021.pdf

Hattie J, (2009). Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. Oxon.