Supporting primary school teachers in differentiating in the regular classroom

Eysink, Tessa H.S.; Hulsbeek, Manon; Gijlers, Hannie

doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.002

Cited by 33 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Twelve of the 13 studies principally employing survey methodology to investigate differentiation used self‐developed questionnaires (Adami, 2004; Edwards et al ., 2006; Scott and Spencer, 2006; Smit and Humpert, 2012; Roiha, 2014; De Neve et al, 2015; Goddard et al ., 2015; De Neve & Devos, 2016; Eysink et al ., 2017; Gaitas and Alves Martins, 2017; Kaur et al ., 2019). Most of these questionnaires had not been piloted or otherwise validated, most did not refer to or build on measures adopted in previously published research, and almost half did not report sample items (Adami, 2004; Edwards et al ., 2006; Scott and Spencer, 2006; Smit and Humpert, 2012; Roiha, 2014; Gaitas and Alves Martins, 2017).…”

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nine studies employed either experimental ( n = 8) or quasi‐experimental designs ( n = 1). The one study employing a quasi‐experimental design (Eysink et al ., 2017) applied measures both pre‐ and post‐delivery of an intervention which included a control group but no randomisation. An additional eight studies used experimental designs which included both randomisation and control grouping.…”

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four of the 11 studies focused on the impact of differentiation on student achievement within academic subjects; three examined this across multiple curricular domains (Beecher and Sweeny, 2008; Ernest et al ., 2011; Eysink et al ., 2017), and one focused on science specifically (Mastropieri et al ., 2006). Three studies reported improvements in student achievement (Mastropieri et al ., 2006; Beecher and Sweeny, 2008; Ernest et al , 2011), but one found that students in the intervention group performed substantially lower than those in the comparison control group (Eysink et al ., 2017). Further research is warranted to understand the subtleties of differentiation and its impact on student learning and achievement, with attention to how this may vary across settings, cohorts and curriculum areas.…”

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation: investigating conceptualisation, characteristics, and methods used

Graham

Bruin

Lassig

et al. 2020

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of a pedagogical practice known as ‘differentiation’ has become more common over time as educators have sought to respond to increases in the diversity of students enrolling in their local school. However, there are now so many misperceptions and definitional inconsistencies that it is difficult to know what is being enacted in the name of differentiation or indeed what is being researched internationally. The aim of this scoping review was to identify key characteristics of and conceptualisations within peer‐reviewed empirical research on differentiation published between 1999 and 2019, as well as to map the ways in which this body of research was produced. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to inform a systematic screening process and resulted in a final sample of 34 articles focusing on differentiation in regular schools. Half were conducted in the United States and most in the elementary school phase. Survey and case study designs were dominant, as was research of and influences on teacher practice. Only a small group of studies focused on differentiation's impact on student outcomes and these typically only examined specific elements of differentiation or its use in specific academic domains. The diversity of focus and methodological approaches across the 34 studies prevents comparison of findings and weakens the evidential basis to make claims of either differentiation's effectiveness or indeed its ineffectiveness. The review concludes with recommendations for future research and practice in this important area of practice.

show abstract

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Qualitative Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation: investigating conceptualisation, characteristics, and methods used

Graham

Bruin

Lassig

et al. 2020

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The three conceptual foundations just described are united in the ability-adjusted jigsaw method (see also Eysink et al 2017). This method is based on the original jigsaw procedure of Aronson et al (1978) which, compared to more traditional types of instruction, has proven to be effective in terms of academic achievement (Karacop and Doymus 2013;Tarhan et al 2013).…”

Section: The Ability-adjusted Jigsaw Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

BE COOL! a digital learning environment to challenge and socially include gifted learners

Eysink

Dijk

Jong

2020

Education Tech Research Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the development of the BE COOL! learning environment that gives all children, gifted and non-gifted, the opportunity to learn at a level matching their specific needs and abilities within the social context of regular education. BE COOL! uses the ability-adjusted jigsaw method, in which children of varying ability levels work together on a design for which they acquire knowledge by working on tailored assignments in groups with children with the same ability level. This differentiation method unites elements of learning by design, learning together, and learning by inquiry. In this article, we first present the conceptual foundations underlying BE COOL! Next, we describe the learning environment and its components as incorporated in a seven-week science lesson series in which fourth to sixth graders must design a liveable house on the moon for a family of four. Then, we describe our design process, in which research and development alternated and we end with a brief presentation of the learning environment's added value for educational practice.

show abstract

“…Therefore, it can affect the students' responsibility that possibly influence the results of social science learning. Eysink (2016) shows that innovative learning model in social science learning is aimed at easing the students' burden in mastering the material about the environment that has the wide scope. Learning model becomes the teacher's guidance in conducting the learning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Students’ Responsibility Through Numbered Head Together Model in Social Science Learning at Elementary School

Widyaningtyas

Winarni²,

Murwaningsih³

2018

IJIET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is aimed at developing the application of responsibility through the implementation of Numbered Head Together model in the social science learning process. The type of this research was descriptive analysis using qualitative approach. The subjects of the study were the third-grade students and teachers of social science learning in Sukoharjo Sub-district. Data collection techniques in this study were documentation studies, observation, and interviews. The findings of the research were analyzed using interactive analysis of Miles and Huberman model and presented through descriptive narrative text. The results of the research show that: 1) the learning result of the third-grade students in social science subject is not maximal yet, 2) the students are not aware of the social science learning objectives for their future, 3) the teachers remain applying the conventional model, 4) the teacher has not implemented the social science learning process involving the students' responsibility. The characteristics of Numbered Head Together learning model are suitable to be applied in learning social science because it makes the students serious in learning, develop thinking skills, and improve social relationships among students that can be used as a means to develop the students' responsibilities in the social studies learning process.

show abstract

Supporting primary school teachers in differentiating in the regular classroom

Cited by 33 publications

References 23 publications

A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation: investigating conceptualisation, characteristics, and methods used

A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation: investigating conceptualisation, characteristics, and methods used

BE COOL! a digital learning environment to challenge and socially include gifted learners

Developing Students’ Responsibility Through Numbered Head Together Model in Social Science Learning at Elementary School

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About