how do you provide differentiation for adults? eip subgroup research

How Do You Provide Differentiation for Adults?

EIP Subgroup Research

Background

• In 2000, there was a small group of consultants who had been the key decision-makers for the project and primarily provided the training and technical assistance for the project

• There were additional consultants who attended meetings for the project, but their participation was limited

Background

• The number of consultants involved in training and technical assistance increase each year from 2000 to 2003

• In the 2003-2004 school year, the team expanded to the full consulting staff, all of whom would participate in the research subgroups

Background

There were levels of prior knowledge of EIP that required differentiation in content

Developed Training Components

New to SERC

New to EIP

Attended EIP Training/ Meetings

Provided EIP TA or Training

Novices

Novice Proficient Expert

The Novice

• Needs– Background and history of EIP, including the

vision and core values– Information on the training components– Formats for training and technical assistance– Connections for personal contributions that

could be made to the project– Clearly defined roles in the research work

The Proficient

• Needs– Information on the newer training content– Rationale and shared meaning on the

selection of the current training components and the current vision of EIP

– Reflection on the sustainable effectiveness of the training and technical assistance

– Rationale and expectations for the research work

The Expert

• Needs– Reflection on the vision of EIP– Reflection on the sustainable effectiveness of

the training and technical assistance– Different perspectives on how the

components of training and technical assistance connect to other initiatives and structures of the school/district culture

– Current research on the EIP components

Therotical Framework for Differentiation

FACTSWhat is the impact of EIP training and technical assistance?

CONCEPTSWhat are the major themes of effective elements?

PRINCIPLESWhat structures sustain EIP?

GENERALIZATIONSWhat should EIP training

highlight?

THEORYWhat is the framework needed to

sustain EIP?

A Framework for the Intended Learning

(Purcell, 2003)

Wha

t are

the

face

ts o

f the

EIP

Com

pone

nts

that

are

effe

ctiv

e?

Therefore…There is a need to broaden expertise beyond the past EIP Consultants and bring in a variety of expertise and perspectives.

Differentiation of Instructionis a teacher’s response to learners’ needs

guided by general principles of differentiationsuch as:

respectful tasks flexible grouping ongoing assessmentand adjustment

teachers can differentiate

Content Process Productaccording to students’

Readiness Interests Learning Profile

through a range of instructional and management strategies…

(Tomlinson, 1999)








(Tomlinson, 1999)

A consultant's ability to critically analyze and use research








(Tomlinson, 1999)

A mixture of whole

group; small groups –

mixed experience with

EIP and alternative

grouping for novices








(Tomlinson, 1999)

A combination of informal conversations and formal participant evaluations








(Tomlinson, 1999)

Research and reflection on early intervention process and strategies








(Tomlinson, 1999)

Small groups – mixed

experience with EIP

to review the

literature on early

intervention








(Tomlinson, 1999)

A revision of EIP components








(Tomlinson, 1999)

Level of experience with EIP and personal expertise beyond EIP








(Tomlinson, 1999)

Self-choice on topic area








(Tomlinson, 1999)

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSCONTENTINTRODUCTIONINITIAL INSTRUCTIONPREASSESSMENTDIAGNOSIS

MANAGEMENT OF FLEXIBLE, SMALL GROUPS

CHOICEALTERNATIVES

Adjusting the Breadth

TIERING

Adjusting the Depth

What are the CRITICAL DIFFERENCES in my students?How can I MODIFY one or more of the 10 curriculum components to address difference?

POST ASSESSMENT

MEASURE THE IMPACT OF DIFFERENTIATION

GRPG INTRO TCHG LRNG PROD RES EXT. TIMECONTENT ASSMNTS

(Purcell, 2003)

THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSCONTENTINTRODUCTIONINITIAL INSTRUCTIONPREASSESSMENTDIAGNOSIS

MANAGEMENT OF FLEXIBLE, SMALL GROUPS

CHOICEALTERNATIVES

Adjusting the Breadth

TIERING

Adjusting the Depth

What are the CRITICAL DIFFERENCES in my students?How can I MODIFY one or more of the 10 curriculum components to address difference?

POST ASSESSMENT

MEASURE THE IMPACT OF DIFFERENTIATION

GRPG INTRO TCHG LRNG PROD RES EXT. TIMECONTENT ASSMNTS

(Purcell, 2003)

Critical Difference –

Experience with EIP

The Critical Differences-CBAM

Novice

Awareness: What is EIP?

Informational: What does the training of EIP look like?

Novice to Expert

Personal: Why am I involved with EIP? Why are we changing EIP?Management: How can I manage the expectations of this research?

Proficient to Expert

Consequence: How do I help schools implement EIP?Collaboration: How can I contribute to the learning process with my colleagues?

Expert Refocusing: How will my ideas for improvement be incorporated into EIP training?

(Hall & Hord, 2001)

The Lesson or Unit Components That Could Be Differentiated

• Content/Knowledge– Research and reflection on early intervention process and strategies

conducted through the different personal expertise, perspectives, and interests

• Assessment– A combination of informal conversations and formal participant

evaluations• Grouping formats

– A mixture of whole group; small groups – mixed experience with EIP and alternative grouping for novices

• Introduction– A provision of the history, an overview of training and technical

assistance and the rationale for the need to conduct the review• Teaching activities

– A provision of specific content on the components of EIP, such as Curriculum-Based Assessments

– Group investigation process

(Purcell, 2003)

The Lesson or Unit Components That Could Be Differentiated

• Learning activities– The small group process of reviewing the literature

• Resources– A bibliography of the major resources for EIP, vehicles for

organizing and conducting the review of literature• Products

– A revision of the EIP components• Extensions

– A critical analysis of the quality of the research• Time

– Flexible use of time structures to allow individuals and small groups to determine the amount of time needed

(Purcell, 2003)

Component Novice Proficient Expert

Goal To learn the basics of EIP and enrich EIP with their unique expertise and objective perceptive

To reflect on the current practices of training and technical assistance

To analyze the impact of training and technical assistance and critically evaluate current research

Teaching Background on history of the projectReview of literature

Review of training and technical assistanceReview of literature

Evaluation of the impact of EIPReview of literature

Learning Small mixed group investigation

Small mixed group investigation

Small mixed group investigation

Product Revision of the EIP components

Revision of the EIP components

Revision of the EIP components

Resources EIP training materialLiterature

EIP training materialLiterature

EIP training materialLiterature

Designing Alternatives (Purcell, 2003)

A Rationale for Small Mixed Groups

Consultation Collaboration CoachingExpert EIP consultants provide history, support for understanding the current EIP components, and share the vision and expectations of EIP to others

The various levels of experience blend their personal expertise and perspectives to critically analyze the components of EIP

A mutual exchange of facilitating reflection on effective early intervention strategies and process

(Lipton, Wellman, & Humbard 2002)

Initial Phase Final PhaseResearch Timeframe

How the Differentiation Was Organized

The Novice

• Differentiation– Background and history (in small chunks)– Models and examples of the training and

technical assistance – Grouped with more experienced EIP

consultants to help with understanding– Participation in research on the components

of EIP in terms of personal expertise beyond EIP lens

The Proficient

• Differentiation– The big picture behind the history– Reflection of the training and technical assistance – Grouped with more experienced EIP consultants to

deepen understanding– Grouped with less experienced EIP consultants that

need teaching; therefore promoting reflection– Participation in research on the components of EIP in

terms of assisting implementation at schools and districts

The Expert

• Differentiation– Reflection on the history– Reflection on the effectiveness of training and

technical assistance – Grouped with less experienced EIP

consultants that need teaching; therefore promoting reflection

– Participation in research on the components of EIP in terms of effective training content

Samples of the Differentiation

June 17thA Celebration of EIP Accomplishments

Sharing Specific Projects • What has changed over the last two years?• What did we learn?• What do we hope to accomplish in the future?

EIP Retreat Agenda-Day 1A Sample of the Professional Development Provided to Full Consulting Staff

Same activity, whole group with differentiated purposes

For the Novice – An overview of the training



EIP Retreat Agenda-Day 1


For the Proficient – To review recent changes in training

A Sample of the Professional Development Provided to Full Consulting Staff





For the Expert – To reflect on recent changes in training and their effectiveness



June 18thA Reflective Team Process

• Developing student outcomes (whole group)

Same activity, small groups-mixed experience with EIP with same purpose

For the Novice – To contribute a personal expertise (beyond EIP) and an objective lens on the purpose of EIP






For the Proficient – To review their experience working with EIP and define the purpose of EIP






For the Expert – To reflect on the impact of EIP on schools and the core purpose of EIP




• Reflecting on EIP through a case study (small group)

Same activity, small groups-mixed experience with EIP with differentiated purpose

For the Novice – A model and example of technical assistance






For the Proficient – A reflection of the effectiveness of technical assistance






For the Expert – A reflection of the specific facets that are effective in technical assistance


September Follow-up

• Provided information and activities on – Reflective Team Process (A Technical

assistance model used in EIP)– The TA report

• Showed a video presenting educators sharing their experiences with EIP


For the Novice – An overview of EIP technical assistance and how it looks at a school level


September Follow-up





For the Proficient – Developing shared meaning on the elements of technical assistance for EIP


September Follow-up





For the Expert – Reflection on the elements of technical assistance and their implementation at the school level


Guidelines for Subgroup Work• Purpose:

– Examine data to measure the impact of EIP – Examine issues such as integrity, sustainability,

disproportionality, research-based strategies, and the promotion of inclusive practice

– “The analysis will be used to refine and enhance the professional development EIP offers in 2004-2005.” This will include program design and other support.

Same activity, self-selected small groups-mixed experience with EIP with differentiated purpose

For the Novice – To contribute a new expertise to EIP and an objective lens







For the Proficient – To contribute experiences of EIP and share real examples of implementation







For the Expert – To contribute the history of EIP and share the rationale and vision of the training components


Sharing the Results of the Research

• All subgroups shared the results of their work

• They shared insights, key research, and products of new thinking

Same activity, self-selected small groups-mixed experience with EIP with same purpose

For the Novice – To contribute an expertise and an objective lens that encourages new insights on EIP components

The Research Subgroups Share in January






For the Proficient – To reach new insights on the components of training and technical assistance needed for EIP







For the Expert – To reach new insights on the components of training and technical assistance needed for EIP



An Alternative Group for the Novice

• We created multiple opportunity forums for consultants to receive EIP 101– Actually attending the core skills training– Cracker Barrel Meetings– Shadowing TAs on-site

Unfortunately…

• No one attended the core skills training• We held one meeting where three people

attended• We had to cancel the rest due to low

enrollment• Only a few shadowed the TA visits, mostly

at Reflective Team Process visits

Why?

• We had checked several times with specific individuals

• The most common response was regarding hectic schedules that did not allow for them to attend

• We then provided as much content as possible in the monthly EIP meetings

• We counted on the subgroups to help

And It Worked!

• By January, evaluation feedback from the novices no longer reflecting any need for EIP 101

• More connections were made across initiatives

The Reactions from the Novice

Evaluations- From June

• “I found it interesting to learn about EIP. I’m unsure how I’ll contribute.”

Response• We need objective eyes

and ears.• We value different ideas,

perspectives, and experiences.

• EIP will be providing background to “new” EIP consultants.

• EIP team members need to help each other find his/her voice.

The Examination of EIP: A Follow-up From the June Retreat

Evaluations-From June

• “Would have been helpful to have better grounding before the day. There was somewhat of a disconnect for me. Much of the day related to those who have been doing EIP.”

Response• Killing two birds with one

stone-We hoped to provide updates and reflection for those who have been “doing” EIP, as well as provide background to “new” EIP consultants.

• An overview and history of the project needs to be provided for “new” people.


Evaluations from September

• EIP is coming into focus! The differentiated instruction was great, very helpful in understanding reflection. The “reality RTP show” (role-playing) was also helpful.

• I still don’t feel I have the big picture of EIP but I think this will be coming in the future. I am very comfortable doing self-study, online lunch bunch to learn this.


• To get an overview of EIP initially could be through a PowerPoint with a lunch bunch Q & A to clarify. Then we could get more in-depth by attending EIP trainings currently scheduled. I think an overview is necessary in some for whether people choose to do more in-depth as well.


• Seems like a lot of groups found things that validate EIP ~ I’m still learning about EIP & would appreciate the groups highlighting what currently is being addressed and needs to be in the future.

Being “New “ to EIP, all of the presentations were very valuable to me

Evaluations from January

• I had only a basic knowledge (what I learned via EIP mtgs and the summer retreat) of EIP-mostly theoretical; Have not yet “experienced” EIP in the field – practical implementation

• All the information helped to further my understanding of EIP

Evaluations from January• Seems like a lot of groups found things that

validate EIP ~ I’m still learning about EIP & would appreciate the groups highlighting what currently is being addressed and needs to be in the future

• This was a good opportunity for me to gain further understanding about EIP and the parts that make it up. I still feel somewhat unclear about all that EIP entails, but the more I hear, the more I understand

The Reactions from the Proficient


+

• “Good to have everyone on ‘same page’ per topic. I did not attend any training this year, so very helpful to get.”

Response

• Teambuilding and shared meaning will be an ongoing process this year as we build a new team.

• This has been a good way to “catch people up” with training they were not able to attend.



+

• “It gave me an insight into each project and what was done this past year.”

Response

• Insight and understanding will help us reflect as we move forward.



+• “It was very helpful to

see each of the components of the EIP model-finally able to see the pieces as part of the bigger picture”

Response

• The examination of components, as we continue to explore them, should begin to connect “the dots” at an individual level, team level, and a project level.



• Very informative day with a lot of overview/historical grounding for me. Felt the sharing of June Retreat evals and Index Cards was an excellent base foundation to work with. Subgroup work for me seemed (CT Research) hard to get a handle on. I’m sure this will improve as our group meets more.

Evaluations from September• Clarity on Components. Seems some confusion over

what are components vs. indicators vs. outcomes. May be that components need to be looked at from 2 perspectives: SERC’s and school-based team’s (training program vs. characteristics of bldg-based team). TA report seems too much of a checklist. Where are the expectations / outcomes from the TA visit.

• TA form discussion very rich. Agreed it is a tool to share what happens during a TA session. Thanks for taking the time to process! Nice, concise overview of the RTP process. Role-play of RTP was very valuable learning opportunity. Another day of great ideas generated from synergy of this great team.

Evaluations from September• Enjoyed / found valuable – Kim’s presentation

on reflective practice making connections specifically to the RTP – using good examples. The activity in which we generated possible questions was very helpful!

• It is truly a pleasure to be part of an organization that regularly seeks input from all. However, some things like the TA Report form don’t warrant such extensive discussion and minimal feedback should be sufficient

Evaluations from January• The conversation about assessment appears to

need much more investigation as a full group seems critical!

• I would like more info on social marketing. The assessment info (maybe framework?) links, in some ways; to the original EIP Core Training session, but goes way beyond in terms of scope and process. Schools/teachers are doing lots of assessment, but are they approaching it in a comprehensive way?

Evaluations from January

• Maintaining positive, productive relationships between SERC and the districts/schools we work with a key factor in success of initiatives

• Anything we develop with regard to working effectively with districts can only strengthen all initiatives

The Reactions from the Expert


• “Although time spent bringing all up to speed was likely more valuable for some than others. Mostly repeat for me.”

Response

• Killing two birds with one stone

• Reflection begins with an examination of what is currently being done.



• “ Was this the best way for all of us to spend the day…I recognize that you are structuring a change process and …moving along some of the [members]. What percentage of the total group do they represent?”

Response

• This is a new team with new ideas.

• This is a change process. We are structuring a change process together. Change is about creating new ways/ideas and no one at this point in time knows what the change will be.



• You need to balance activities that don’t get “finished” – like rubrics, with activities that can get closure to accommodate the preferred learning styles of team members – they may be smaller accomplishments. Be careful with suggesting people put “more” time into this – they aren’t necessarily connected yet and have their own projects to be dong.

Evaluations from September• The video provided a nice overview of EIP. The

people being interviewed talked about the components of EIP, but we really didn’t observe them. The video and task were not in sync.

• Good job tying together today’s session with last June – great job compiling the data. Appreciate opportunity to choose subgroup. Thanks for clarifying subcommittee and subgroup. Michelle’s perception exercise “eye opening” (pun intended).

Evaluations from September• The group may need some direction on the “art” of RTPs. There is

a danger that focused questions can be framed with a “gotcha” stance (evaluative, judgmental). I think that a basic question facing EIP coordinators is how much information and process needs to be taken to the entire group vs. focused work for selected subcommittees.

• Realize this is very tough to organize this re-examination of the project, especially with such varied background levels of experience, EIP familiarity, etc. Need to keep in mind the level of understanding of all the consultants (and time/availability) re the project in providing input to the degree it was sought today. Think all will have a lot to offer over time but difficult right off the bat… Perhaps MK can help clarify.

Evaluations from September• TA report activity seemed to be a rehashing of

subcommittee’s work – realize we need team’s input, but seemed premature due to lack of experience with TA form (and EIP TA in general) – perhaps doing the activity with smaller group having specific TA experience might have worked better. Still some confusion re EIP components and reflection in TA report items.

• Good differentiation of activities for folks with varying degrees of background. RTP overview was very informative and helpful in preparing us for participating in these this year. DI format, again, was helpful here .

Evaluations from January Kudos to all. The depth of theses presentations reflects

the seriousness with which people viewed their tasks and the intensity of literature review. It was also apparent to me that the group, as a whole, has a much stronger understanding of EIP

• Consultants collaboration & Teaming seemed to overlap a lot with organizing structures supporting sustainability, and both involve looking closely @ culture of the school/district…might be good to look @ connecting assessment & RBS with the PSP “tweaking” past practice here is necessary, but again we need to make it do-able & hopefully not have to revamp everything!

Evaluations from January• Need to look at student outcome data… I would

like to see a subgroup look more comprehensively at what data we collect, how, when & maybe look at a couple of “pilot” schools or districts in depth

• Most of the reports connected to my knowledge and experience base. A salient exception was “Problem-Solving” method presented by Megan’s group. I have a number of questions about this approach which I will take up with Megan’s group

Evaluations from January• Most of it! Very informative presentations with

many connections to our work in the past & considerations for future directions ~ however, I get concerned about keeping it “teacher (or school) friendly” ~ we know so much from this research (& past practice) ~ compiling it for use & acceptance with schools will be some tasks! I was especially interested in Susan C.’s comments/perspective, particularly in regard to marketing of EIP. This is something we need to look closely at when approaching schools/districts & other stakeholders

Resources and Theoretical Connections

• Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing Change: Patterns, Principles and Potholes. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.

• Lipton, L., Wellman, B., Humbard, C. (2002). Mentoring matters: A practical guide to learning-focused relationships (2 ed.). Sherman, CT: Mira Via.

Resources and Theoretical Connections

• Purcell, J. H. (2003). Curriculum Differentiation. Presented at the Training of Trainers for Differentiated Instruction, State Education Resource Center.

• Tomlinson, C. A., Kaplan, S. N., Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J. H., Leppien, J. H., Burns, D. B. . (2001). The Parallel Curriculum: A Design to Develop High Potential and Challenge High-Ability Learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

• Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

how do you provide differentiation for adults? eip subgroup research

Documents