Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differentiation as measured by the Classroom Practices Survey: a validity study updating the original instrument

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Learning Environments Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Classroom Practices Survey assesses educators’ use of differentiated instruction with students achieving at average and high levels. The purposes of this study were to investigate if the Classroom Practices Survey (1) yields reliable and valid data from the groups for which it was originally designed and (2) can be used to evaluate teachers’ differentiation practices for students who achieve at low levels. Participants included 648 elementary teachers who completed the Classroom Practices Survey for students achieving at high, average and low levels. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the original six-factor model was not supported by the current data. Model fit was improved with a four-factor model, but did not reach the recommended values for good model fit. Further research and possibly modifications are needed before this tool is used by researchers and schools. This study highlights the importance of periodically evaluating instruments and revising them if necessary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Lawati, F. A. K., & Hunsaker, S. L. (2007). Differentiation for the gifted in American Islamic schools. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(4), 500–518. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2007-501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, F. X., Jr., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beecher, M., & Sweeny, S. M. (2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and differentiation: One school’s story. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(3), 502–530. https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2008-815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1992). On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 400–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: Guiford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21(2), 230–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Chief State School Officers. (2013). InTASC model core teaching standards and learning progressions for teachers. Retrieved from: https://ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/2013_INTASC_Learning_Progressions_for_Teachers.pdf.

  • Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, C. J., Carr, S., & Siegel, W. (2006). Influences of experiences and training on effective teaching practices to meet the needs of diverse learners in schools. Education, 126, 580–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geldhof, G. J., Preacher, K. J., & Zyphur, M. J. (2014). Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods, 19, 72–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, M., & Gable, R. K. (2001). From the students’ perspective—My Class Activities: An instrument for use in research and evaluation. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 322–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, M., & Owen, S. V. (1999). An investigation of the effects of total school flexible cluster grouping on identification, achievement, and classroom practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(4), 224–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, M., Paul, K. A., McIntosh, J., Fugate, C. M., & Jen, E. (2014). Total school cluster grouping and differentiation: A comprehensive research-based plan for raising student achievement and improving teacher practices. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, M., Rizza, M. G., & Owen, S. V. (2002). Examining perceptions of challenge and choice in classrooms: The relationship between teachers and their students and comparisons between gifted students and other students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(2), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620204600207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, G. H., & Kuzmich, L. (2014). Data driven differentiation in the standards based classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hertberg-Davis, H. (2009). Myth 7: Differentiation in the regular classroom is equivalent to gifted programs and is sufficient: Classroom teachers have the time, the skill, and the will to differentiate adequately. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 251–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertzog, N. (2005). Equity and access: Creating general education classrooms responsive to potential giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 213–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunsaker, S. L., & Shepherd, P. (2010). Policy perspectives on gifted education. In S. Hunsaker (Ed.), Identification: The theory and practice of identifying students for gifted and talented education services (pp. 121–141). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latz, A. O., Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Adams, C. M., & Pierce, R. L. (2009). Peer coaching to improve classroom differentiation: Perspectives from Project CLUE. Roeper Review, 31, 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2015). An introduction to replication research in gifted education: Shiny and new is not the same as useful. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59, 157–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mammadov, S. (2014). A need to rethink about national consensus on preparing teachers of the gifted: A policy brief. The William and Mary Educational Review, 2(2), 15–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina, J. (2008). Brain rules: 12 principles for surviving and thriving at work, home, and school. Seattle, WA: Pear Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2014). Mplus, v.7.2. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

  • National Association for Gifted Children. (2008). The role of assessments in identifying gifted individuals. http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/Position%20Statement/Assessment%20Position%20Statement.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • National Association for Gifted Children. (2010a). Pre-K to Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards. http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/standards/K-12%20programming%20standards.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • National Association for Gifted Children. (2010b). Guiding questions to apply the Pre-K to Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards. https://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/pre-k-grade-12-7. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • National Association for Gifted Children and Council for Exceptional Children, The Association for the Gifted. (2013). NAGC—CEC Teacher preparation standards in gifted and talented education. http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/standards/NAGC-%20CEC%20CAEP%20standards%20%282013%20final%29.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • National Association for Gifted Children and Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. (2015). 2014–2015 state of the states in gifted education: Policy and practice data. https://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/key%20reports/2014-2015%20State%20of%20the%20States%20(final).pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • Renzulli, J. S. (2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the 21st Century: A four-part theoretical approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(3), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212444901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (2004). Curriculum compacting: A research-based differentiation strategy for culturally diverse talented students. https://gifted.uconn.edu/schoolwide-enrichment-model/compacting_for_at_risk/. Accessed 10 Jan 2018.

  • Sousa, D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2010). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience supports the learner-friendly classroom. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamps, L. S. (2004). The effectiveness of curriculum compacting in first grade classrooms. Roeper Review, 27(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C. A., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Tomchin, E. M., Landrum, M., Imbeau, M., et al. (1995). Preservice teacher preparation in meeting the needs of gifted and other academically diverse students. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Johnsen, S. K. (2007). Teacher education standards for the field of gifted education: A vision of coherence for personnel preparation in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 182–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207299880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, C. Y. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

Download references

Funding

This research was funded by the United States Department of Education, The Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program (Award #S206A140011).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA

    Nielsen Pereira, Juliana Tay, Yukiko Maeda & Marcia Gentry

Authors
  1. Nielsen Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juliana Tay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yukiko Maeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marcia Gentry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nielsen Pereira.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Classroom Practices Survey items used in this study

Classroom practices Please respond to each statement three times, indicating how often you use these strategies with students of different achievement levels by clicking the appropriate response for each achievement level.

figure a
figure b

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pereira, N., Tay, J., Maeda, Y. et al. Differentiation as measured by the Classroom Practices Survey: a validity study updating the original instrument. Learning Environ Res 22, 443–460 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09284-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09284-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation