Students Achievement and Differentiated Instruction in Mathematics
Introduction
Teaching the students in mathematics needs the professional concern. Many educators already addressed the needs of the students in learning. Despite of the growing number of pedagogical concepts, still many students finds it hard to go along with the others. Therefore, another call to recognize the importance of human variability for instruction is set to adequately answer the needs of a learner.
Background and Problem Statement
Based on the survey, student’s achievement on assessment immediately following a differentiated lesson showed a significant improvement from that following a traditional lesson. About 60-70% of students stated that they found the differentiated lesson considerably or extremely interesting. Over 75% of students believed that they would achieve good or very good results on an assessment following the differentiated lesson. A number of the classes involved in this project had a higher male to female ratio. At Central, teachers have observed that male students are more likely to disengage and have behavioural problems in a traditional classroom setting. Male students were observed to have a higher comfort level in taking risks in their learning in a differentiated instructional environment. The students who were at risk for failing the course were able to achieve overall success by the end of the semester following the implementation of differentiated instructional strategies (MISA Report, 2009). Based on the recent report, the differentiated instruction is an effective strategy to help the students cope with the process of learning. Because of this idea, the study set two questions:
1. In what ways will the differentiated instruction be applied in Mathematics?
2. How effective the differentiated instruction will be?
Research Aim and Objectives
The main aim of the study is to investigate the differentiated instruction for the students’ achievement in learning mathematics. In order to facilitate the investigation, there are four objectives that need to be considered. First is to demonstrate the strategies in differentiated instruction. Second is to assess the effectiveness, as well as the benefits and drawbacks of the educational settings that implemented the differentiated instruction in teaching mathematics. Third is to describe the perceptions of the students and educators in the issue of differentiated instruction. And fourth is to craft recommendations to strengthen the differentiated instruction.
Literature Review
In schools, teachers are the one who will promote the learning among the students. Because of the traditional methods of instruction, most of them stated that there is a need of a program that will create a positive impact on student attendance, engagement, and classroom behaviour. It is noted that there is an increase in student achievement credit attainment after differentiated instructional strategies were initiated. This made the teachers recognised the importance of collaborating with colleagues. On the other hand, teachers found a greater enjoyment using differentiated instructional strategies as students worked harder and teachers could act as facilitators rather than as instructors. In addition, teachers were able to assess students on an ongoing basis to check for understanding and readiness (MISA Report, 2009). However, during the early years of the twentieth century initial attempts to individualize instruction in mathematics (as another initiative for instruction) were included in approaches such as differentiated staffing, the "Winnetka Plan" (a non-graded approach) and the "Dalton Plan" (an independent study approach). Since that time, many alternative procedures and pedagogical techniques have been developed to further meet the individual needs of students. These approaches have ranged from self-paced, competency-based individualized packets to independent studies to modular scheduling. Along with these innovations in curricular design have come research studies that purportedly investigate the effectiveness of these "new" procedures (Horak, 1981).
Methodology
The applied method in the study is the combination of quantitative and qualitative data. The primary data will be gained through the application of survey and interview. The students will the correspondents of the survey under the Likert Scale for and hence, the study will determine the perceptions of the students in the concept of differentiated instruction. While the teachers will be the subject for interview and will be asked about the effectiveness of the differentiated instruction and how will they handle the issues and problems associated with it. The secondary data will be collected from the various academic contexts, journals, case studies, educational reviews or reports and others to incorporate the result of primary data with the previous information.
References:
Horak, V., (1981) A Meta-Analysis of Research Findings on Individualized Instruction in Mathematics, Journal of Educational Research, 74(4): 249
MISA Report, (2009) The Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction on Student Engagement and Achievement, Oshawa Central Collegiate Institute [Online] Available at: http://www.curriculum.org/MISABARRIE/files/DifferentiatedInstruction.pdf [Accessed 30 September 2010]
0 comments:
Post a Comment