Teachers’ cognition and practice concerning differentiation in German teaching in the Danish upper secondary school The development of the Danish society has caused a need for more well educated people which has resulted in a large intake in the Danish upper secondary schools (gymnasieskolen). This amount of intake implies that the group of students has become far more heterogeneous than formerly. Furthermore, each learner’s ability and knowledge is different due to different preferences and backgrounds. They went to different schools and had different teachers, who practiced different teaching methods. Moreover, Danish students have the possibility to have an extra voluntary year in lower primary school (grundskole), in which they can deselect L2 without any consequences for the later intake at an upper secondary school. This contributes to even further heterogeneity in the German class, as some students have had five years of German teaching others six while yet others have had a 1-year break. Besides this, the schools have a financial incentive due to a taximeter regulation per fulltime- equivalent student and performance-based pay. Moreover, the schools are not only judged by their grade point average but also by their ability to have the students perform better compared to previous student records (løfteevne). In addition it is evident from the curriculum that the teaching has to take into consideration differences of abilities and qualifications. In this way, the answer of the Danish school system to the problem of heterogeneity seems to be differentiation within the classroom (undervisningsdifferentiering) as opposed to ability grouping. This manifests itself both in a formal demand and an actual need created by the framework conditions. Studies have been done on teacher cognition of differentiation in above all a general didactic and a scientific context, but barely in the specific context of foreign language. Against this background the following research questions were asked: 1. Which patterns can be observed in the way the German teachers differentiate in the first year of upper secondary school in Denmark? 2. What beliefs and knowledge do the teachers have about differentiation? 3. Are practise and cognition correlating? The aim of the study was to examine what German language teachers do and think about differentiation to use this information combined with the theory about differentiation and foreign language learning to elaborate recommendations, which aims directly at the foreign language teaching. Secondly, the study reveals something about the trend of the time. Do the teachers wish to break with the tradition of handling the heterogeneity within the classroom? Thirdly, the study aims at finding out whether the practices of the teachers correlate with 1) the official demands and 2) their own cognition. Interviews and observations with seven teachers and document analysis were used to elicit data to fulfil the research aims. I made semi-structured classroom observations of the teaching of seven teachers for three weeks each to gain knowledge about the practise. Data consisted of notes in a self-developed observation schedule and auditory recordings. By means of an interview guide composed for the purpose I interviewed the teachers about their understanding of and beliefs about differentiated instruction. Subsequently, the observation notes and the interview transcriptions were analysed in NVivo. The results show that differentiated feedback on student assignments, variation, and occasionally differentiation carried out by the students themselves but facilitated by the teachers through open assignments are the most common kinds of differentiation. The differentiation relates to methods, interests, emotions, and ability – last-mentioned mostly in accordance to linguistic accuracy. Except for the above-mentioned examples, traditional teacher-led differentiation is only observed in the teaching of one teacher. In general, the teachers hold a relatively wide understanding of differentiation, although traditional teacher-led differentiation in accordance to ability is dominating. In spite of the fact, that they are not practising it. A condition of which they are aware and explain with the workload connected to this kind of differentiation. Moreover, the majority stresses, that they give priority to other aspects such as authenticity. The conclusions of the teachers’ practise and cognition, the theory on differentiation, and the definition of foreign language according to The Common European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR) resulted in the following recommendations: 1) An increased focus on the different competences included in the foreign language, with an attention drawn to ability rather than flaws; 2) Flexible ability grouping combined with the structure: Phase A: community of the whole class, phase B: group, individual or pair work, phase C: community; 3) differentiation according to emotion, which will probably lead to motivation, which is essential to utilization of potential; 4) more focus on differentiation carried out by the students, but facilitated by the teachers combined with extra attention to the scaffolding and supervision for the ones in need of it; 5) generation of new interests; and 6) avoidance of differentiation in accordance to what you could call disguised differences such as gender, which often turns out to be about something else. To realize point 2 and 4 it would be advantageous if there were evolved learning materials, within which the differentiation was implemented. In general there is a need to find out which kinds of differentiation are most effective: does an increased focus on the different competences within the foreign language lead to better learning results? Is differentiation carried out by the students themselves more motivating and thus more effective than traditional teacher-led differentiation?
