Theoretical Framework & Literature
Differentiation and Intellectual Autonomy
Bender (2012)
This book details various considerations and strategies of differentiated instruction for students who may have different kinds of learning disabilities. It offers a framework of three types of differentiation – by content (what students learn), by process (how students learn it), and by product (how student learning is evaluated). It explores how every aspect of a classroom can affect student learning, including the physical, procedural, and cultural classroom structure, and how students are grouped together. Finally, it provides specific strategies for classroom arrangement, engaging student attention, and addressing students’ needs in the ways that suit them best by using the three types of differentiation. The book is incredibly useful for my inquiry because it focuses on serving students with specific learning disabilities, instead of only giving strategies for general classroom differentiation. It will serve as a resource for how I can best modify instruction for my students – not only those with documented disabilities, but also those who may simply learn better in more non-traditional ways.
Betts (2004)
This paper provides a theoretical framework for fostering autonomy of gifted students as a product of differentiation. It breaks down the process of learning into three levels: Level One, where the prescribed curriculum is strictly followed and students are viewed solely as students; Level Two, where teachers modify their delivery of course material to best differentiate for their students, who become both students and learners; and Level Three, where students become full learners, producing knowledge rather than consuming it. In Level Three instruction, students develop cognitively, socially, and emotionally during three phases of knowledge production: exploration, investigation, and in-depth study. The paper recommends that most instruction time be spent in Level Two, with 10% of instruction time being devoted to Level Three. This paper has several flaws, including its sole focus on “gifted” students, its lack of experimental evidence, and the seeming arbitrariness of its recommendation. Nevertheless, the paper is useful because it addresses the same line of questioning as my research inquiry, and outlines several considerations that might be made when researching such a topic, such as the role of socioemotional learning and the breakdown of instructional time.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2021)
This article explores strategies for encouraging student autonomy and empowerment via increased engagement, decreased disruption, and a sense of belonging. It uniquely provides very specific and detailed techniques with concrete examples. Recommendations include giving students a say in class-wide decisions, taking student feedback on what they want to learn about, giving students leadership opportunities, and being flexible in how students choose to complete assignments. A lot of emphasis is placed on giving students a sense of belonging in the classroom, which in turn gives them the confidence to take charge of their own learning. This article is helpful for my inquiry because of the specific examples of autonomy-increasing techniques it provides. Instead of giving a general framework, it details strategies that seem to work in many classrooms, which I can attempt to replicate in my own classroom to see how my specific students respond.
Domen, et al. (2020)
This study provided questionnaires to both teachers and students in order to discover whether teachers’ perceptions of student autonomy support aligned with students’ own perceptions, and whether differentiated need support affected student motivation. The study found that across multiple classrooms, teachers’ perceptions of student autonomy support did indeed correlate positively with students’ autonomous motivation. However, differentiated student-specific structures correlated positively with students’ controlled (and not autonomous) motivation. In essence, the study suggests that teachers may be providing differentiated support that is ultimately controlling rather than autonomy-supporting. This study is useful to my research inquiry because it demonstrates that my topic is worth pursuing; teachers in general seem to have a difficult time creating autonomous spaces for every student via differentiation. The study also highlights a potential risk in my practical research moving forward, in that I will have to be careful in constructing differentiated supports that do not overly constrain my students, rather than providing them with the greater autonomy I intend.
Ford (2012)
This resource showcases how differentiation can be used to benefit English Language Learners who not only may still be learning English, but who also may be adjusting to American pedagogy and culture. It introduces a framework that evaluates EL students’ needs along three axes – readiness, interest, and learning profile – along with suggested modifications to the curriculum based on content, process, product, or affect. The resource emphasizes that ELL differentiation requires a holistic view of the student, suggesting a variety of strategies for relationship-building, high expectations, student assessment, collaboration, and learning materials. Furthermore, it includes video examples that show ELL differentiation in practice. I can utilize this resource for my inquiry both by applying its ELL differentiation framework and by putting its recommended strategies into practice. The video examples are especially helpful because they provide a visual demonstration of how I might enact the various strategies in my classroom.
Government of New South Wales (2021)
This article provides various strategies for differentiated instruction, focusing specifically on students who may be lacking in foundational skills. In addition to providing conceptual reasonings behind considerations that should be made, it supplies specific examples of strategies that build on those considerations. It outlines six different methods of differentiation – by challenge level, by complexity, by resource availability, by learning outcome, by procedure, and by end product. It then explores techniques such as compacting, curriculum layering, menus, cubing, and choice boards. By providing multiple options for skill-based differentiation, this article gives my inquiry a lot of flexibility to adapt to my students’ particular needs and preferences. Its framework of six types of tiering is further useful because it enables me to draw more specific conclusions about which kinds of tiering may be more or less helpful for my classroom.
Martinek, et al. (2016)
This study used questionnaires on students from childhood to late adolescence to discover the relationships between motivation and academic self-regulation, and perceived autonomy support and differentiation. It found that older students, especially those in secondary schools, perceive less autonomy support and differentiation in school. It also found that both perceived autonomy support and perceived differentiation had a positive impact on students’ academic self-regulation. Although the study focused largely on the impact of differentiation and autonomy support on self-regulation, and not on each other (as in my inquiry), it is nevertheless useful in two important ways. First, it frames differentiation and autonomy support as important problems that become especially apparent in secondary school, which is the site of my research. Second, it demonstrates a correlation between differentiation and autonomy support, in that they both serve as pathways towards increased academic self-regulation, which many regard to be an important factor in student learning and development.
McCombs (2010)
This article delineates specific strategies and methods for fostering responsibility and autonomy in students, focusing on their holistic well-being. It draws from several different sources, including neuroscience research, brain study findings, inquiry-based learning techniques, and blended learning techniques. Recommendations include giving students meaningful and appropriate choices, emphasizing student ownership, incorporating students’ personal interests, setting clear standards, providing consistent feedback, leveraging student curiosity, and building confidence. The article is unique in that it also promotes socio-emotional learning as a way for students to control negative emotions and enhance their emotional intelligence, which leads to increased cognition. The article is useful for my inquiry because it provides a baseline framework of potential techniques that can be used to create student autonomy. Its myriad of research sources and recommendations is particularly beneficial because not every method can be expected to work in every classroom, but I will likely find at least some methods that work for mine.
