Abstract
This paper presents a detailed explanatory model for adaptive and differentiated instruction. The model combines current practices for mathematics instruction with recommended practices for formative assessment. The model can best be implemented using classroom network technologies (such as TI-Nspire Navigator with TI handhelds), but it can also be used with manual data collection means such as personal whiteboards for each student. The model is presented for mathematics, but could be easily extended to science instruction or other subjects. Experience with adaptive and differentiated instruction suggests that teachers grow to full master level proficiency over time, often over a period of years, and that some teachers never reach that level. Accordingly, two transitional models are presented, an immediate (entry-level) model and an expert model for adaptive instruction. Fully differentiated instruction is incorporated in the ‘Master’ model. Growth from immediate, to expert, to master level requires development of skill with the technology, but more important are critical changes we infer in the teacher’s beliefs, as well as growth in their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Thanks to Jeremy Roschelle of SRI International for his contribution to these definitions.
- 2.
Thanks to Jeremy Roschelle for his contribution to these definitions.
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 1.
Center for Technology in Learning, S. I. (2009). Does teacher knowledge of students’ thinking in a network-connected classroom improve mathematics achievement? TI EdTech Research Note #14. Dallas: Texas Instruments.
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Constructivist and objectivist methods. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Clark-Wilson, A. (2009). Connecting mathematics in the connected classroom: TI-Nspire™ Navigator™. Chichester: The Mathematics Centre- University of Chichester.
Clark-Wilson, A. (2010a). Emergent pedagogies and the changing role of the teacher in the TI-Nspire Navigator-networked mathematics classroom. ZDM, 1–15. doi:10.1007/s11858-010-0279-0
Clark-Wilson, A. (2010b). Emergent pedagogies and the changing role of the teacher in the TI-Nspire Navigator-networked mathematics classroom. ZDM, 42(7), 747–761. doi:10.1007/s11858-010-0279-0.
Cox, S. (2008). A conceptual analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Ph.D. dissertation, Brigham Young University, Provo.
Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H. (1992). The evolution of teachers’ instructional beliefs and practices in high-access-to-technology classrooms first-fourth year findings ACOT. Cupertino: Apple Computer, Inc.
Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers in Education, 57(3), 1953–1960. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.010.
Hall, G., Loucks, S., Rutherford, W., & Newlove, B. (1975). Levels of use of the innovation: A framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1), 52–56.
Heritage, M., & Stigler, J. W. F. R. W. (2010). Formative assessment: Making it happen in the classroom. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372–400.
Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., R., H. S., Johnston, C.,… Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4–24.
Penuel, W. R., Beatty, I., Remold, J., Harris, C. J., Bienkowski, M., & DeBarger, A. H. (submitted). Pedagogical patterns to support interactive formative assessment with classroom response systems. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment.
Penuel, W., & Singleton, C. (2010). Classroom network technology as a support for systemic mathematics reform: Examining the effects of Texas instruments’ MathForward Program on student achievement in a large, diverse district. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching (JCMST), 30(2), 179–202.
Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria: ASCD.
Roschelle, J. (2009). Towards highly interactive classrooms: Improving mathematics teaching and learning with TI-Nspire Navigator. Menlo Park: SRI Center for Technology and Learning, SRI International.
Roschelle, J. (2011). Improving student achievement by systematically integrating effective technology. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 13, 3–11.
Ruthven, K. (2009). Towards a naturalistic concepualisation of technology integration in classroom practice: The example of school mathematics. Education & Didactique, 3(1), 131–149.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bellman, A., Foshay, W.R., Gremillion, D. (2014). A Developmental Model for Adaptive and Differentiated Instruction Using Classroom Networking Technology. In: Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., Sinclair, N. (eds) The Mathematics Teacher in the Digital Era. Mathematics Education in the Digital Era, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4638-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4638-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4637-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4638-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)