Differentiated instruction in self-contained special education classrooms

Differentiated Instruction in the Self-Contained Special Education Classroom

Differentiation in the Self-Contained Special Education Classroom: A Defense of Differentiation and the Importance of Special Education Environments

Thanks to the No Child Left Behind Act, increasing educational research, and a revitalized interest in special education students and the methods by which they receive the best education possible, the question of differentiation has once again taken a starring role in K-12 drama. According to Thompson, whose 1999 Personalized Learning article about differentiation predated the current overwhelming response to the topic, differentiation "causes us to grapple with many of our traditional -- if questionable -- ways of 'doing school'" (pg. 12). Indeed, Thompson (1999) argues that in order for differentiation to work, teachers must "know where we want to end up before we start out -- and plan to get there. That is, we must have solid curriculum and instruction in place before we differentiate them" (pg. 13). In discussing this important first step in the differentiation process, Thompson (1999) unintentionally uncovers the importance of differentiation in modern education. Differentiation is a means, not an end, but it can be the most important tool in helping students reach that all-important end of nor only grasping knowledge, but also of learning how to think, reason, and operate in the so-called real world. Education is a process that involves the mind, but also the heart and the body. Students are not all gifted in the same manner, and some may even be unable to perform certain tasks. Furthermore, education greatly involves the heart, and students who are asked to perform tasks that they do not enjoy or do not feel like they can succeed in accomplishing can have a difficult time when it comes to learning, as they feel unmotivated. Finally, to use a cliche, students are all "wired differently," meaning that some of them have stronger tendencies in certain subjects and areas of study. Thus, differentiation is beneficial for all students by incorporating the trio of mind, body, and heart in a positive classroom environment that lets students feel comfortable while simultaneously stretching them.

Although the term differentiation is used quite frequently in association with the traditional classroom or the inclusion classroom, it has not been fully investigated in regards to the self-contained special education classroom. As discussions about inclusion and differentiation in the traditional classroom continue to gain popularity, the self-contained special education classroom is, in some localities, in a fight to survive. Brown (2004) writes that "with suitable supports, including differentiated instruction, students ranging from gifted to those with significant disabilities can receive an appropriate education in general education classrooms" (pg. 34). In a discussion of the rhetorical uses of special needs terminology, Tomlinson (1982) says that the term "special needs" bas been used "as a legitimation for the exclusion of more and more children from the normal education system and for placing them in a type of education which does not allow them to compete for educational credentials, and subjects them to even more social control than in normal schooling" (pg. 72). Arguments such as these have been used in increasing number as of recently in order to condemn the institution that is the self-contained special education classroom. However, research shows that, while inclusion can be beneficial to some students, special education classrooms are still necessary. For instance, Zigmond et al. (1995) found in three different research studies that general education inclusion environments produced academic results that could be described as neither "desirable nor acceptable" for students with learning disabilities (para. 1). Thus, inclusion is not always the answer for students with special needs. However, the self-contained special education classroom cannot expect its students to have uniform needs any more than can the general education teacher or the inclusion instructor. Therefore, it is necessary that teachers, parents, and children in self-contained special education classroom understand the benefit of differentiation. Teachers in such arenas must be constantly on the lookout for ways they can personalize education, for ways in which they might encourage students to understand concepts using their unique strengths and abilities. While some special education students have learning disabilities and others physical, mental, and emotional disabilities, differentiation techniques can be use to address all of these students in order to fast-track them on the road to the final outcome -- an ability to function in society using the facts and processes learned in primary and secondary education. In the self-contained special education classroom, teachers who use differentiation strategies will not only encourage learning at a higher rate, but they will also allow student to develop their mind, body, and heart trio in order to feel capable of undertaking life in the "real world." Furthermore, instructors who engage in differentiation techniques in the self-contained special education classroom may be able to further the cause for this particular classroom's existence, showing teachers, parents, and administrators that the differentiation techniques used in the special education classroom are moving this classroom from the era in which it was used to delay students to giving them the best chance at receiving an education that will help them further their careers and personal lives after graduation.

I. Review of Literature

Tomlinson (1999) sets the tone for a discussion of diversification with her vision of how the practice is carried out. She shows how one teacher gives a history lesson in a traditional sense, by giving students a lecture, requiring them to take notes, and then asking them to complete questions in the textbook. This lesson is followed by a test that is preceded by a quiz. However, Tomlinson (1999) also shows how a teacher uses diversification to give the same lesson, using graphic organizers, bringing in artifacts such as art and pictures, and inviting student to participate by dressing up, bringing in food, and reading period literature. Tomlinson (1999) writes that both classrooms have serious flaws, and suggests that both the diversified and the traditional classroom must have two elements in order to make it successful. According to the author, "student understanding and student engagement" are those two elements -- "students must really understand, or make sense of, what they have studied and should also feel engaged in or 'hooked by' the ways they have learn'" (pg. 14). The purpose of diversification, then, is enhancement, and Tomlinson states that diversification can "help young people realize that learning is satisfying" (Tomlinson, 1999, pg. 14). Thus, Tomlinson argues that a differentiated classroom must be based upon the concepts that the teachers want the students to learn. After teachers have come up with a plan, they can assess "the readiness, interests, and learning of [their] students and [involve] them in goal setting and decision making in their learning" (Tomlinson, 1999, pg. 14). Thus, Tomlinson (1999) gives the picture of a classroom that involves differentiation, a classroom that could be managed at any level -- from special education students to gifted students. Some of the features of Tomlinson's model include role-playing, multimedia, and student decision based on personal interest.

In later scholarship, Tomlinson (2000) revisits the topic of differentiated instruction and builds on her previous work by establishing some concrete definitions and standards. For instance, Tomlinson (2000) gives a definition of differentiated instruction: "At its most basic level, differentiation consists of the efforts of teachers to respond to variance among learners in the classroom" (pg. 1). Further, the author provides four key classroom areas that a teacher can differentiate -- content, process, products, and learning environment. Finally, the author concludes her argument by stating that differentiation is necessary in the elementary grades because of the diverse students in elementary grades and the evidence that suggests students who are "taught in ways that are responsive to their readiness levels…interests…and learning profiles" perform better academically (Tomlinson, 2000, pg. 1). However, Tomlinson reminds readers that it is of the utmost importance that the instruction that is differentiated is quality instruction to begin with.

Although Tomlinson's works do a great deal to describe the process of differentiation and its importance, they do not directly involve the concept of differentiating instruction in the special education classroom save to argue that differentiation is one way to deal with a classroom of learners at diverse ability levels. Before discussing this concept, however, it is at first necessary to discuss the self-contained special education classroom and its place in the modern educational realm. Tomlinson et al. (2003) in their discussion of diversification in today's modern classroom, point out that one of the reasons that diversification has become such a buzz word in educational circles as of late is an emphasis on mainstreaming special education students. The authors write that "these demographic realities are intensified by (a) an emphasis on detracking to promote equity for students who might otherwise find themselves schooled in low-expectations environments" (pg. 1). Tomlinson (1982) would agree with this assessment, suggesting that terminology has been invented to rationalize the way in which children with special needs are given less attention and less help on their journey to complete a primary and secondary education. Thus, the idea of inclusion was born, an idea that suggests students with special needs be paired alongside students who are gifted, students with different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and students who have different modes of learning (Tomlinson et al., 2003).

Despite this, evidence exists to suggest that the self-contained special education classroom still serves the needs of many students with special needs, suggesting that fears related to special education students' inferior treatment may not related to this particular classroom arrangement. Zigmond et al. (1999) found that students with learning disabilities did not show optimum academic results when integrated into the inclusion classroom. The authors write that students with learning disabilities are often placed in special education for a reason -- because they do not benefit from traditional education. However, the authors do contend that determining where to place such students is never easy. In his brief comparison of education to baseball, VanSciver (2005) writes "NCLB dictates that educators disaggregate student performance data into cells determined by various criteria, suggesting that the performance of the students in the different categories is determined by conditions unique to their groups. It would follow that strategies for improving the scores of the students in those categories would be specifically designed to meet their needs" (pg. 535). VanSciver (2005) continues by suggesting that the fact that students are not taught in these categories makes educating them more complicated. Agran, Alper and Wehmeyer (2002), although they support the inclusion classroom, found in a survey of teachers that many do not support the idea of having students with severe disabilities included into the general education classroom. Indeed, the authors found that a majority of the teachers surveyed "did not believe that access to the general curriculum is appropriate for students with severe disabilities and that these students should not be held accountable to the same performance standards as typical peers" (pg. 129). Although the authors concluded that this opinion meant teachers found access to the general curriculum to be more important for students with mild disabilities, it can also be interpreted to mean that teachers view the self-contained special education classroom as the place where students will find the greatest degree of aid in their education. However, Cawley et al. (2002) found that students with severe emotional disabilities did not negatively affect the learning environment when included with general education students in a science experiment that was implemented and designed by research project staff and teachers. In addition, Cawley et al. (2002) found that the rates of general education and special needs students passing the course were comparable. What this suggests is not that the self-contained special education classroom be done away with, but that it be reserved for those students who need it, while others can receive the benefit of differentiated general education classrooms.

However, just because a student is a member of a self-contained special education classroom does not mean that student cannot be a recipient of differentiated instruction. Much to the contrary, students in self-contained special education classrooms are best served when they receive education that is personalized or tailored to their needs. This gives special education students the best chance of competing with their general education peers after graduation. Smith and Urquhart (1996) offer one example of this through a science classroom. Children who had been identified as having special education needs when it comes to reading and writing were assessed using questioners that required reading and writing for scientific understanding. Although the students, as could be expected, performed poorly, when they were asked to design a model for other students using what they had learned, their completion of the task in addition to the discussions between them as observed by the teacher, suggested comprehension. Based on this, the authors argue that "some children identified as having special educational needs, particularly those whose scientific understanding is often assessed through their difficulties with some of the skills associated with literacy and sometimes numeracy can contribute to their own and others' scientific understanding through collaborative talk" (Smith and Urquhart, 1996, pg. 152). Thus, this is one method through which teachers could provide differentiated assessment to students in the self-contained special education classroom.

According to Armstrong (2003) the history of special education is fraught with difficulties experienced by students in previous eras who had been classified as needing special education services. Often times, these students were excluded and did not receive education with in the "ordinary classrooms" (pg. 39). Predating this was the incarceration and institutionalization of many who were considered to be mentally retarded. Even students in so-called special education programs would be later transferred to institutions. Today, such action seems grossly unjust, however, it serves to remind educators and others who work in the social, educational, or human services fields that it is important to continue along the path of progress in order to give students with disabilities the education that best suits them and their special needs. Differentiation is one of these progressions. In the self-contained special education classrooms, students who receive differentiated education will not only receive a better chance at leaning facts, processing material, and gaining skills that will put them ahead for the rest of their lives, but they will also have the chance to learn that learning can, indeed, be enjoyable, just as Tomlinson (1999) pointed out among general education students.

II. Action Plan

Author's Conclusions and Recommendations

To conclude, it is important to note that the degree to which differentiated instruction is applicable in classrooms throughout the world cannot be underestimated. Based on a progressive view of education that suggests the student is the center of learning, diversified instruction can encourage students who may perform poorly in school if taught using traditional methods. Further, diversified instruction appeals to students' natural creativity, and helps them build an attitude toward academia and education that is positive. In other words, diversified education allows students to look on learning with fondness. Thus, it can be concluded that diversified education is positive, and like Tomlinson (2000) argues, it has the ability to increase students' individual potential. However, teachers who implement diversified education cannot do so without caution. Tomlinson (1999, 2000) makes a strong case for the fact that diversification is a way to personalize instruction, not a theory through which classrooms are turned into fun environments where no learning actually takes place. Indeed, as VanSciver (2005) argues, "Instruction should be differentiated, not content" (pg. 535). Although Tomlinson (2000) does identify content as one area that can be diversified, the authors primary purposes are in chorus -- it is irresponsible to diversify the basic content that students are expected to learn in order to make learning itself more enjoyable, prevent behavior problems, or advance students. Instead, as Tomlinson (1999) argues, teachers must start out with the end in mind. They must form an idea of what they want their students to know before diversifying instruction. The goal must be that all students are able to attain the skill or knowledge that the teacher sets out for them, and this content area must be well developed using state standards and other measures of appropriateness. Thus, in all situations, diversification can make learning a more enjoyable and applicable experience, but it must be exercised with caution.

Although the same applies to teachers in the self-contained special education classroom, it is perhaps more important that these teachers implement diversification processes, not only in activities, but also in assessment. As Smith and Urquhart (1996) point out, failing to do so could result in failing to promote or pass students who have a great deal of understanding about a topic, but are simply unable to articulate it. Furthermore, diversification in the special education classroom may be greater than diversification in the inclusion classroom or in the general education classroom as not only do special education teachers have to consider abilities, but also learning styles, personal interests, physical abilities, etc. However, for this reason, diversification in the special education classroom can perhaps lead to greater results than in the inclusion or general education classroom, as given the tools to succeed it is likely that students who have been previously identified as difficult learners will, indeed, attain that success.

Finally, it is necessary to mention that the topic of diversification in the self-contained special education classroom supposes that classroom's right to exist. Based on relevant research and data that have shown the importance of students' relieving specialized treatment and education in some instances, it is clear that such a classroom must be made available. However, using differentiated instruction in this kind of classroom further legitimizes its presence by suggesting that students are not placed into self-contained special education classrooms so that they can be ignored, as Armstrong (2003) can certainly agree was once the case. Instead, these students are placed in classrooms where they can receive the best, most differentiated, and most personal treatment possible. Thus, incorporating diversification into my classroom, and encouraging its growth among my colleagues, will be an important part of my growth as a teacher who hopes to help special education students attain all they can.