Reading Instruction
Running head: READING INSTRUCTION
Reading Instruction through Differentiated Practice
Amanda J. Sanchez
Capstone Essay
Peabody College
1
Reading Instruction
2
Abstract
This essay explores the topic of teaching reading through the strategy of differentiated
instruction. While the concept of differentiated instruction is discussed and some of the
principles of reading instruction are addressed, the primary purpose of this essay is to make more
explicit the link between reading instruction and differentiated instruction, and to illuminate the
possibility of using both types of instruction together in order to best address the unique needs of
each student in the classroom. This essay is structured to cover the “why?” and “how?” questions
of differentiated instruction, and also to offer practical implications and questions for
consideration. Additionally, a significant portion of this essay investigates the concept of
differentiated reading instruction in the four areas of learner and learning principles, learning
environment, curriculum and instructional strategies, and assessment.
Reading Instruction
3
Introduction
During my time at Peabody, one very important area of my coursework focus has been in
the area of literacy, and one crucial aspect of this is reading instruction. Undeniably, reading
instruction is an extremely significant topic within elementary education today, and it is an
extremely important area for teachers to be prepared to address as they step into the classroom.
The importance of reading instruction is evident from Wilson et al.’s (2008) assertion that the
task of learning how to read is undeniably at the core of students’ success in school (p. 41).
However, as teachers attempt to meet the various demands of reading instruction in the
classroom, it is sometimes easy to feel overwhelmed by the sheer amount of information,
research, and ideas that flow out of the field of reading instruction as a whole. Even beyond
having a grasp of the vast amount of knowledge contained in the field, the various reading ability
levels of students in any given classroom can present an elusive starting point for instruction and
further complicate the implementation of effective reading instruction for all students.
Although reading instruction is a very broad topic that is inundated with information and
complicated by the diversity of strengths that students bring to the proverbial and literal reading
tables, providing successful and effective reading instruction for students is certainly an
attainable goal that should be held by all teachers. While there are numerous strategies for
providing effective reading instruction for students, the aim of this essay is to more fully explore
one possibility for providing highly beneficial reading instruction for every student in the
classroom: the approach of differentiated instruction. The merits of differentiation within reading
instruction are that it can not only help teachers to best meet each learner’s needs, but it can also
help teachers streamline their instructional practices into what will be most effective for their
particular students. The purpose of this essay will be to investigate the “why” and “how” of
Reading Instruction
4
differentiated instruction in reading through asking the questions, “Why differentiate reading
instruction?” and “How do teachers differentiate reading instruction?” These two focuses will
offer greater insight into both the theoretical and practical sides of differentiation in reading
instruction, providing implications for practice and perspective on questions pertaining to the
topic.
A Definition of Differentiated Instruction
As a precursor to asking, “Why differentiate instruction?” the question of what
differentiated instruction means ought first to be posed. For the purposes of this essay, two
proposed definitions of differentiated instruction will be offered: one that is based on a broader
definition of differentiation, and another that can be more specifically applied to the area of
reading instruction. Based on a more encompassing understanding, differentiation can be
conceptualized according to the definition offered by Gregory and Chapman (2007), who
maintain that differentiation is an organization of beliefs that helps educators to address the
individual needs of each student (p. 2). This definition may be broad, but it very specifically
targets perhaps the most important facet of differentiation, which is addressing individual
differences, levels, abilities, and needs. In regard to differentiation’s meaning in the content area
of reading, Walpole and McKenna state what they say is at the core of a differentiated plan for
instruction: it is knowing the current position of students, the direction they must go, and some
approaches for helping them arrive there in a timely manner (2007, p. 7). More specifically, their
conceptualization of differentiated instruction can be pinpointed as the belief that all students are
entitled to classroom instruction in literacy that enables students to achieve in activities that are
just beyond their grasp, instruction that both “directly and temporarily” address a specific student
group’s needs (differentiated instruction is monitored and pushed forward by assessment),
Reading Instruction
5
instruction that uses a “developmental model” and presumes that students could have needs in
different literacy areas but that the need for automaticity with words must first be enabled, and
supplemental instruction to excellent whole class instruction that is at grade level (2007, p. 2).
Differentiation can also be defined in terms of what it is not, and according to one source,
it is not an organizational approach, but rather, a pedagogical one (Stradling & Saunders, 1993;
parenthetically cited in Tomlinson et al., 2003, p. 121). This understanding of differentiation
implies that it is not merely a tool for managing the classroom, students, or materials, but instead
it is a method and framework for engaging in effective instruction for all students.
Differentiation can also be understood as a teaching strategy that focuses on the proactive
modification of curriculum, resources, activities, methods, and learner products, seeking to meet
the varied needs of individuals and small groups, and heighten opportunities for learning for each
child (Bearne, 1996; Tomlinson, 1999; both parenthetically cited in Tomlinson, 2003, p. 121).
When teachers apply this understanding to the content area of reading, great potential exists for
helping every child succeed as a reader.
The Why of Differentiated Instruction
With the above definitions of differentiation in mind, the question, “Why differentiated
instruction?” is easily answered. Without instruction, similar to that which Walpole and
McKenna have already described above, that addresses students’ current state, sets clear and
attainable goals for them, and offers the assistance that they need to achieve those goals, teachers
and students are much more likely to set themselves up for failure in the end. All three elements
are vital to effective instruction, and differentiation helps teachers take each element into
account. Moreover, Tomlinson et al. (2003) logically conjecture that a contemporary intrigue “in
what is called ‘differentiated instruction’” stems from a level of academic variation that teachers
Reading Instruction
6
cannot turn away from (p. 121). In essence, the academic frontier is truly as Tomlinson et al.
propose: it might be that teachers do not have the valid decision of if they will address academic
variation, but instead, they can only make decisions about how they will address the variance
before them (Sizer, 1985; Stradling & Saunders, 1993; both parenthetically cited in Tomlinson et
al., 2003, p. 121).
The Why of Differentiation in Reading Instruction
While differentiation can be a valuable approach to instruction in any subject area, it does
have particular merit in the content area of reading. Gregory and Chapman assert that nobody
would make the claim that all students are alike (2007, p. 1), and this definitive principle has
powerful implications in the area of reading. Particularly in my first grade student teaching
placement, the fact that students possess a range reading abilities was very evident, and this is
undeniably true of nearly every classroom. However, differentiation provides one of the most
advantageous options for meeting varied reading abilities and needs of students, and this is done
through an adequate understanding of what each child brings to reading instruction. Levy states
that the top floor of a building cannot be built without the infrastructure of the floors below it,
and teachers will be successful by starting at the place of each student’s individual level (2008, p.
162). Applying this mentality to the area of reading, it is crucial that teachers adequately attend
to the diverse reading needs of each particular child in their classroom so that they can build on
what each child already possesses. Gambrell, Malloy, and Mazzoni say that the most telling
indicator of what a student will learn is the knowledge that they already possess (2007, p. 22);
thus, building on prior knowledge cannot be overestimated.
Research from Connor, Morrison, and Katch (2004), as well as Connor, Morrison, and
Petrella (2004) (both discussed in Walpole & McKenna, 2007, pp. 6-7) evidence just how
Reading Instruction
7
important differentiated instruction can be in the area of reading. Findings from Connor,
Morrison, and Katch (2004) evidence that for students who started the year of first grade with
lower-level decoding and vocabulary abilities, and for those who started with low decoding and
high vocabulary abilities, explicit instruction that was directed by the teacher provided greater
growth in decoding (in Walpole & McKenna, 2007, p. 6). On the other hand, for students who
started the first grade possessing high vocabulary and decoding abilities, greater growth was
experienced through implicit instruction that was directed by the student, with explicit
instruction that came from the teacher being less important (Walpole & McKenna, 2007, p. 6).
In the Connor, Morrison, and Petrella (2004) study, comprehension was the reading area
of investigation, and it was discovered that students who started the year of third grade with
below average or average comprehension in reading experienced greater progress in classrooms
that offered more time with explicit comprehension instruction that was directed by the teacher,
as opposed to more time with explicit instruction that was directed by the child (Walpole &
McKenna, 2007, p. 7). However, for students who started the year of third grade with higher
scores in comprehension, greater progress came through spending more time in comprehension
activities that were managed by the child, including activities that involved peers (Walpole &
McKenna, 2007, p. 7). From this research, it is not difficult to see that differentiating instruction
within reading can have profound effects upon students’ growth in a diversity of reading areas,
for it is evident that the same type of reading instruction will not benefit every single student. A
differentiated approach can be of great value when working with students of all levels in the
content area of reading.
Reading Instruction
8
The How of Differentiated Instruction
While the value of using differentiated instruction, particularly in regard to reading
instruction, is evident, the question of how to provide effective differentiated reading instruction
must be answered in order to provide a solid basis for its successful implementation and practice
in the classroom. Therefore, much of the remainder of this essay will first focus on how
differentiated instruction is congruent with principles of effective practice in each of the four
areas of learners and learning principles, learning environment, curriculum and instructional
strategies, and assessment, and the role that differentiated reading instruction specifically plays
in each area. Moreover, the “how” of differentiated reading instruction will more specifically and
practically be addressed in regard to implications for practice.
Learners and Learning Principles
Perhaps one of the most elemental principles in regard to learners and learning principles
is that fact that no two students are alike. Gregory and Chapman (2007) state that we are told by
experience and study about the human brain that students each are unique, learn in unique ways,
and possess varied “likes, preferences, and needs” (p. 1). Furthermore, Tomlinson (2001) states
that the picture of a student who is “’standard issue’” is not consistent with much of what is
known about the diversity that is largely present in any learning group (p. 9). While it is
impossible to meet every unique need of every single student within the confines of a classroom
with limited resources and time, it is possible to approach instruction in a way that more
adequately meets the diverse needs of students. One of the first steps toward this type of
instruction is to follow the insight of Rock, Gregg, Ellis, and Gable (2008) who maintain that the
student, not the content, is the emphasis of differentiated instruction (p. 35). Rock et al. say that
this might require a change from emphasizing a content-centered classroom to emphasizing a
Reading Instruction
9
student-centered classroom, and this change can eradicate an educational approach that is
tailored only to one size (2008, p. 35). In the area of reading instruction, adherence to this
concept would necessitate a dominant focus upon individual students and their reading needs
rather than the curricular demands of covering specific materials and standards that are likely
well above some students in the class and far below others.
While it is obvious that instruction cannot be geared to only one type of learner, there are
other important learning principles that differentiation can also address. One of them is the
principle that is offered by Gambrell et al. who say that what students already know is the most
telling factor of what they will learn, and the basis for new understanding is previously-held
knowledge (2007, p. 22). While this statement puts background knowledge in a position of great
importance, how teachers utilize students’ background knowledge is of even greater significance.
Differentiation provides a very effective outlet for utilizing background and prior knowledge
because it allows teachers to take an approach that focuses upon the students’ individual previous
understandings and knowledge gaps rather than ignoring the unique knowledge bases that
students bring with them into the classroom.
The role that differentiated reading instruction plays in the area of learners and learning
principles is that it provides a way for teachers to address the individuality, uniqueness, and prior
knowledge of each one of their students. One of the rationales that Morrow and Tracy (2007)
base their chapter upon is that educators must be cognizant that students arrive at school with
reading and writing background knowledge that differs with each child (p. 58). Just as is
maintained by this understanding, reading is indeed a subject in which students possess vastly
different levels of knowledge and experience, and one of the best ways to adequately address
these variances is through instruction that is differentiated according to student needs.
Reading Instruction
10
Learning Environment
In regard to the learning environment, differentiation can strongly address the
development and maintenance of a beneficial learning environment for students. The first way
that differentiation can do so is by incorporating the elements of an efficacious learning
community that Tomlinson (2001) describes: a welcoming environment, respect, safety,
expectations for growth, instruction that aims for success, fairness (which Tomlinson says, in a
differentiated environment, is defined not as equal treatment but as meeting each student’s
individual needs so that success can be achieved), and shared responsibility, as well as what
Tomlinson identifies as more practical directions, which include training children to be involved
group members and planning for the use of flexible grouping possibilities (pp. 21-26). While
these characteristics are unarguably important in the development of an effective learning
environment in any subject area, their impact upon the area of reading instruction can be of great
importance as well, for they can potentially contribute to a classroom environment where
students and teacher engage in reading instruction in positive ways. More specifically, a
successful learning environment for reading should involve what Gambrell et al. describe in
relation to a classroom atmosphere that promotes motivation in reading, including the provision
of an abundance of books in the classroom, chances to make choices, and possibilities for
socially engaging with others (2007, p. 19). A differentiated classroom environment can achieve
these literacy goals of providing many print materials, room for student decisions, and working
with others because, as Anderson (2007) maintains, offering an environment and possibilities
that include all students is of the greatest importance to the educator using differentiation (p. 50),
and each of the above features will help students sense more of a role in their classroom. While
the elements that Tomlinson describes are crucial for any learning environment in any subject
Reading Instruction
11
area, the features that Gambrel et al. mention are important specifically for establishing a
beneficial environment for reading. In combination, both descriptions can create a powerful
classroom environment for reading growth and achievement.
Another potentially important learning environment factor is the way that the students are
arranged for learning and growth in the classroom. In the comparisons that Tomlinson (2002)
draws between differentiated and more standard classrooms, one of the things that she points out
is that whole group instruction is pervasive in traditional classrooms, while differentiated
classrooms rely upon a diversity of arrangements for instruction (p. 26). While whole group
instructional arrangements can certainly be beneficial in their proper context, there are also
reading situations that dictate other organizational mediums to be used. Reutzel (2007) states that
by utilizing a combination of grouping strategies (he lists whole class, small groups, and
individuals), teachers can start to meet the various abilities, needs, and drives of students in
developing as writers and readers (p. 323). Small groups are one particularly useful grouping
strategy in differentiated classrooms, and Mathes et al. state that the use of small group
instruction has for a while been at the center of differentiated instruction, and when guided by a
knowledgeable teacher, it has been evidenced (they cite parenthetically Elbaum, Vaughn,
Hughes, & Moody, 2000) to be more successful than undifferentiated instruction within a whole
class setting (2003, p. 461). Further substantiating the importance of small group instruction in
reading, Walpole and McKenna (2007) contend that one of the most significant concepts set
forth by Reading First is tiered instruction (p. 2). A focus on student needs becomes more
pronounced as students progress through Tier 1 up to Tier 3, and the evidence is growing that
this type of differentiation model is not only realistic for educators, but will also provide for
student “literacy acceleration” (Walpole & McKenna, 2007, p. 3).
Reading Instruction
12
It is vital that students engage in a range of interactive groupings through whole class,
small group, and individual contexts every day, and groups need to be adaptive and address
student needs, as well as implement literacy “’best practices’” for instruction (Reutzel, 2007, p.
333). While various groupings for differentiation can be beneficial for classroom environments
in general, their effect upon improving the classroom environment for reading instruction is
especially important. If students can be grouped in ways that enhance the potential for learning
growth in the classroom and provide opportunities for each student to learn at his or her level,
then the possibility of enhanced reading growth might become much more of a reality. By using
differentiated grouping strategies during reading instruction, the learning environment can be
customized to suit the unique needs of the students within the group. This point is substantiated
by Gregory and Chapman (2007) who say that all people have areas of greater and less potential
and fascination, and students must be grouped so that they can get the most out of their learning
time according to their achievement abilities (p. 84). Providing small group instruction is just one
way of building a classroom environment that is more supportive of all learners and addresses
reading needs at a more personal level.
Anderson’s previously stated point about an environment that leaves out no students
being most crucial (2001, p. 50) is essential to the proper understanding of classroom learning
environments, and there are several important ways to accomplish this goal. Grouping is one of
the strongest ways to help all children become involved, and it can be especially potent when it is
arranged with attentiveness to student reading needs. Other environment factors, such as those
mentioned by Gambrel et al. (2007) about choice, social interaction, and numerous books are
also important to helping each student feel like they have a place and belong in the classroom.
Reading Instruction
13
Finally, Tomlinson’s (2001) characteristics of efficacious learning environments present useful
standards for establishing an environment to which any child would feel delighted to belong.
Curriculum and Instructional Strategies
Perhaps in no other area is the value of differentiated reading instruction so powerfully
evidenced than in the area of curriculum and instructional strategies. Mathes et al. (2003) claim
that the most instrumental task of lower grades teachers might be to make sure that students
develop adequate ability in reading (p. 459), and although the development of reading
proficiency can be supported through the components of adhering to sound principles of learners
and learning, maintaining a positive learning environment, and engaging in beneficial assessment
practices, Mathes et al. state that synthesis reports on early reading research (they parenthetically
mention Fletcher & Lyon, 1998; Langenberg et al., 2000; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998) point
out that primary grade reading instruction of high caliber can help avoid a large amount reading
incompetence (2003, p. 460). Thus, the importance of advantageous instructional strategies
cannot be overestimated in regard to the topic of reading instruction. Reutzel (2007) mentions
eight vital areas for literacy instruction (including oral language, print concepts, phonemic and
phonological awareness, phonics and alphabetic principle to involve names of letters, fluency,
vocabulary, strategies for comprehension, and spelling and writing), and he says that modern
research potently indicates the need to teach theses areas with instruction that is explicit, or that
involves teachers being straight forward in explaining, modeling, and scaffolding (p. 315). The
use of scaffolded instruction builds upon an important point made by Gambrell et al. (2007) who
maintain that students need to be offered scaffolded instruction in the literacy areas of
comprehension, vocabulary, fluency, phonics, and phonemic awareness so that independent
reading can be encouraged (p. 20).
Reading Instruction
14
While these three mentioned reading instruction components of explaining, modeling,
and scaffolding are critical to effective reading instruction, they ought also to be utilized in a
flexible manner when attempting to offer reading instruction that is differentiated. Tomlinson et
al. (2003) submit that the aim of effectual instruction appears to be pliability in teacher
presentation choice and student decisions in learning and the way learning is demonstrated, in
order for students to discover a fit with their “learning-profile preferences” (p. 131). Successful
reading instruction should not only take into account explicit strategies for teaching, but it should
tie into differentiation by flexibly applying strategies for the way instruction is presented and the
way students interact with it, with the end goal being to benefit all students.
While appropriately providing instruction to all students is vitally important, the
appropriate use of curriculum strategies is an equally important factor in the use of differentiated
reading instruction. While it might seem daunting to flexibly and differentially teach a mandated
language arts curriculum (the task of flexibly teaching a language arts curriculum that is decided
by the teacher can also seem equally daunting), many types of curriculums possess the potential
to be differentiated if approached in the right manner. The key, I believe, lies with the teacher.
Chapman and King (2008) assert that a teacher gives assignments on the basis of student
strengths and increases learning capabilities for students, and every approach and assignment is
purposefully chosen in order to target the learning goals so that each child can achieve (p. 239).
It is the teacher’s responsibility to ensure that the curriculum is being utilized in a way that meets
each child where they are at and helps them move forward to greater achievement. Even with the
best reading curriculum in place, it will fall short of best serving students if it is not backed by a
responsible, knowledgeable, and informed teacher. Teachers must ask the essential question
posed by Rock et al. (2008, p. 35) about the curriculum: What is the content, and why should
Reading Instruction
15
students care? The answer will be very important in the differentiation of the reading curriculum.
Building on this answer, teachers can follow the requirements presented by Walpole and
McKenna (2007) for designing a plan of differentiation that both adapts and responds:
understand the framework of the central instruction scope and sequence, employ and understand
ongoing assessments about student development, use assessment information to make decisions
regarding which differentiation strategies to use, and choose central content to re-teach or preteach (p. 9). Regardless of the specific reading curriculum that is already in place, the above
insights offer a starting point for teachers to adapt nearly any reading curriculum into a resource
that offers even more value to students.
Beyond the very important component of the teacher appropriately differentiating the
reading curriculum, the other critical aspect is what is contained within the reading curriculum
itself. While the specific reading curriculum will vary for each teacher, the Five-Block Schedule
(Reutzel, 2007, p. 333) might be a valuable tool for effectively presenting some of the vital
components of a reading curriculum. It is an organization possibility, partly based on suggestions
from Shanahan (2004) and Mathes et al. (2005), that serves as a useful scaffold for instruction
and contains the following five areas: word work, fluency, writing, instruction in comprehension
strategies, and differentiated instruction in small groups (Reutzel, 2007, p. 333). The importance
of many of these areas is substantiated by the National Reading Panel report (National Institute
of Child Health and Human and Development, 2000), which named phonics, phonemic
awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension as crucial elements in the process of reading
and backed with research instruction in these elements (in Gambrel et al., 2007, p. 20). Reutzel
(2007, p. 333) also contends that the Five-Block Schedule involves important elements of
reading and writing that are presented in his chapter and some reports on reading research, such
Reading Instruction
16
as instruction in decoding and word recognition, growth in fluency, writing, instruction in
vocabulary and comprehension strategies, and guided reading that is oral (Snow, Burns, &
Griffin, 1998; National Reading Panel, 2000) (both parenthetically cited in Reutzel, 2007, p.
333). Surely these are all important areas that should occupy a significant position in the reading
curriculum.
While differentiated instruction is not the only basis for excellence in curriculum and
instruction, it can play a pivotal role in greatly enhancing the curriculum and instructional
strategies that are already in place. Even with excellent curriculum and teaching, it will be very
difficult to help students achieve the goal of creating a beneficial life through the potential of
education, unless a connection is made between the student and learning (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 9).
Routman substantiates this point by saying that any amount of long-term, positive effect of
teachers must stem from a link between curriculum/objectives and who students really are (2003,
p. 12). Obviously, it is not enough to solely present an outstanding curriculum and/or use highly
effective instructional strategies; the learner’s needs must also be taken into consideration, and
when there is a link between the child and what they are being taught (like the connections that
Tomlinson and Routman describe above), the potential for learning can be heightened, especially
in the area of reading, where there are such an abundance of instructional possibilities and
demands in the classroom.
Assessment
In the field of education, the importance of assessment cannot be underestimated, and
especially in regard to differentiated instruction and effective reading instruction, assessment has
a vital role. Walpole and McKenna (2007) assert that the differentiation of instruction would be
unattainable without assessment (p. 11), and Rock et al. state that assessment is a pivotal
Reading Instruction
17
component of instruction that is differentiated (2008, p. 37). Moreover, the capability to
beneficially impact teaching and learning is held by different types of evaluations that are
educated through “research in educational measurement” (Afflerbach, 2007, p. 266). Building on
the instruction-assessment connection, Reutzel (2007) says that the use of assessment is central
in differentiating instruction so that the divergent literacy requirements of students are addressed
(p. 317). Therefore, in both the areas of differentiated instruction and reading instruction,
assessment takes on a role of inestimable importance.
In my opinion, one of the most vital principles about assessment that teachers should
keep in mind comes from Afflerbach (2007), who defines effectual assessment in reading as
being what influences critical education choices (p. 268). He goes on to say that a primary matter
for teachers is utilizing data from reading assessments to develop what takes place in the
classroom (Afflerbach, 2007, p. 268). Kame’enui et al. substantiate this point through their
assertion that practitioners require honest and useful assessments to customize educational
programs to unique student needs (2006, p. 3). These statements also have a direct link to
differentiated instruction, for they evidence attentiveness to the use of student data in the making
of instructional decisions. This perspective resonates with the description of differentiated
instruction offered by Levy (2008), who says that differentiation is a group of strategies to enable
teachers to address each student at where they are when they arrive in class and propel them as
far as they can go educationally (p. 162). Thus, when considering assessment within the context
of differentiated reading instruction, it is vital that teachers implement assessment as Afflerbach
and Kame’enui et al. describe, using it to direct instructional decisions that support students’
learning.
Reading Instruction
18
While teachers can devise and use assessment in a variety of different ways for reading
instruction (and according to one of Gambrell et al.’s [2007] best practices, a diversity of
assessment strategies should be used to influence instruction), there are specific types of
assessment that can be particularly advantageous for both teacher and students in the area of
reading. Four broad categories of assessment can be utilized, and these include assessment for
screening, diagnosing, progress monitoring, and outcomes (Reutzel, 2007; Walpole & McKenna,
2007). Kame’enui, et al. (2006) also give attention to these four types of assessments in their
article about evaluating the sufficiency of tools for assessing reading proficiency. While these
assessments have implications for the area of reading, they can also be used successfully in
differentiated instruction. Three particular assessments – screening, diagnosis, and progress
monitoring – especially work together: if risk is determined in an area screened, differentiated
instruction assessments are next provided (diagnostic tests used to find unique needs), and after
differentiated instruction is in use, progress monitoring assessments are utilized and decisions are
made at certain times about the need for maintaining the added instruction (Walpole &
McKenna, 2007, pp. 16-17). Teachers should give thoughtful consideration to the use of each
one of these types of assessments, for they possess the potential to offer greater insight in
understanding and helping students along in their reading growth.
While there is indubitable merit in the use of these four types of assessments for reading
instruction, there is still a more far-reaching understanding to which teachers must adhere in
regard to assessment. Gregory and Chapman maintain that similar to the fact that one learning
size does not fit everyone, so too will one assessment size not fit all students (2007, p. 47). At the
heart of effective differentiated reading assessment should rest a key differentiation
understanding offered by Tomlinson: differentiated classrooms provide a place where things held
Reading Instruction
19
in common are recognized and used as a foundation for learning, while learner differences are
also utilized as vital aspects of learning (2001, p. 1). Good assessment can explicate both the
common understandings that should be held by all learners, as well as the unique knowledge that
is individually possessed by each student. And with this insight into student understanding,
teachers possess far greater capability of helping students realize their full reading potential.
Implications for Practice
Tomlinson (2001) explains that teachers who differentiate instruction dwell less upon
having every answer and more upon “’reading their students’” (p. 16). Having been a studentteacher and seeing more of the intricacies of the classroom, I can certainly understand how easy
it is for teachers to concentrate more on the content, curriculum, standards, and even daily
interruptions above addressing the needs of the students. Artley asserts that organization and
instructional approaches appear to be taking preeminence over the issue of individual variances,
and this reality overshadows any guess about the future direction of reading instruction factors
that place the emphasis on addressing individual differences (1981, p. 148). Thus, I would argue
that the first implication for practice is to give adequate attention to addressing student learning
needs more than just trying to stay afloat in the endless current of classroom demands. As part of
her list of ways that educators make their lives more complex, Routman (2003, p 7) submits that
one factor is too much focus on programs rather than children. Reading is an especially large
curriculum area with many mandates, methods, materials, and measures for implementation, and
it is easy to get caught up in all these elements and also overlook the individual students in the
classroom. However, this scenario is unacceptable for the teacher who desires to best serve his or
her students through differentiated reading instruction. Knowing one’s students and their needs
holds particular weight in the area of reading instruction because, reiterating Gambrell et al.’s
Reading Instruction
20
previously stated point, what students already know is the greatest indicator of what they will
learn (2007, p. 22).
In addition to first giving attention to student needs and then planning instruction
accordingly, another important implication for using differentiated instruction in reading is
offered by Chapman and King, who say that teachers who are beginning differentiated
instruction must not start too big, and they should use one or two approaches at a time (2008, p.
2). For teachers who have not used differentiated instruction before, the task of differentiating
reading instruction might seem daunting when pitted against all of the other demands that are
part of a teacher’s classroom responsibilities. However, starting small allows the teachers to
slowly but surely lay the initial foundation for using differentiated reading instruction practices.
While there are many possibilities for incorporating differentiated instruction in the reading
classroom, some of the approaches that Tomlinson (2005) mentions might be good starting
points for reading teachers: graphic organizers, selections of reading materials of varied
complexity, direct instruction in small groups, teaching vocabulary “upfront” in order to
facilitate reading achievement, and compacting the curriculum (p. 10). Although each strategy
should be purposefully applied and selected with individual students in mind, each one presents a
viable option for differentiating reading instruction and deserves consideration by both the
teacher who is just beginning to use differentiation practices, as well as the teacher whose
classroom is almost completely differentiated.
While the specific implications of differentiated reading instruction contain far vaster
possibilities than those presented in this section, the points offered here are two very significant
understandings in regard to practicing differentiated reading instruction. All other practices
should flow from these two understandings. By giving significant attention to student needs
Reading Instruction
21
rather than just the demands of the curriculum, as well as slowly adding to a small set of
differentiation practices, differentiation can become an achievable goal for teachers and a reality
in the classroom. In addition to these two important points, many of the understandings presented
in the four topic areas above also offer some other practical applications for differentiated
practice in reading instruction.
Questions for Further Consideration
In regard to differentiated instruction in the area of reading, one critical variable is the
specific reading curriculum that is mandated or chosen. While resourceful teachers are able to
make adaptations, supplement the curriculum, and customize instruction for each learner
regardless of the reading curriculum used, it would certainly make sense for teachers who
differentiate instruction to interact with a reading curriculum that is most facilitative to the goal
of differentiation. Therefore, the question of which reading curriculums provide things such as
ample opportunities for gaining insight into student capabilities, providing literacy choices that
are made by students, and engaging in different instructional strategies is a possible area for
exploration. Certainly it would be much easier and more productive for teachers to differentiate
reading instruction with a curriculum that is already congruent with many of the principles of
differentiation rather than constantly striving against a reading curriculum that runs counter to
much of what they are trying to accomplish in a differentiated classroom.
A second question for not only further consideration, but also ongoing consideration,
should be answered directly by teachers themselves and is related to grouping and instruction,
which has already been discussed as an important feature of differentiated instruction in reading.
Based on commonalities of weaker readers in her study and others in previous accounts of “lowability groups,” Poole (2005, p. 245) asserts the necessity of drawing distinctions between
Reading Instruction
22
grouping and methods of instruction, a point that she says is supported by some experts (she
parenthetically cites the examples of Gamoran, 1986; Harlen, 1997; Wilkinson & Townsend,
2000). Poole also gives the example of a teacher who directed “mixed-ability groups” with a
presumption that less proficient students were automatically benefiting from being in groups
with academically stronger students (2005, p. 246). From Poole’s evidence and example,
teachers must recognize that special reading grouping does not necessitate reading growth, and
the question that teachers must ask is, “Am I merely providing a potentially beneficial grouping
situation without the instructional support to make it advantageous, or am I offering the
instruction to validate and enrich the grouping choice?” This hits on a larger point that teachers
cannot expect to utilize differentiation strategies for reading instruction without having an
understanding of how and why it will help each individual student. Going backwards from the
structure of this essay, the personal teacher question for further and ongoing consideration should
be not just the “how” of differentiated instruction in reading, but also the “why.”
Concluding Thought
According to Kapusnick and Hauslein (2001), the elements that have the greatest bearing
on student accomplishment include teachers’ emphases on addressing individual needs of
students, as well as teachers’ perspectives on modifying established methods of instruction (p.
159). It is the teacher who controls both of these factors, and I believe this is a very important
realization for all who might consider making a shift to using more differentiated practices in the
area of reading instruction. Despite potential obstacles that stand in the way of an easy or
effortless implementation of differentiated reading instruction, the teacher will be the person to
most greatly determine the eventual success or failure of differentiated reading instruction in the
classroom. Differentiation of reading instruction presents a viable option for making success in
Reading Instruction
23
the content area of reading more of a reality for all children. As teachers thoughtfully choose to
engage in differentiated reading practices for the benefit of each one of their students, the result
will very likely mean greater success for all children in this critical content area of reading.
Reading Instruction
24
Reference List
Afflerbach, Peter. (2007). Best Practices in Literacy Assessment. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M.
Morrow & M. Pressley (Eds.), Best Practices in Literacy Instruction. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Anderson, Kelly M. (2007). Differentiating Instruction to Include All Students. Preventing
School Failure 51(3), 49-54.
Artley, A. Sterl (1981). Individual Differences and Reading Instruction. The Elementary School
Journal 82(2), 142-151.
Chapman, C. & King, R. (2008). Differentiated Instructional Management. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Gambrell, L. B., Malloy, J. A., Mazzoni, S. A. (2007). Evidence-Based Best Practices for
Comprehensive Literacy Instruction. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M. Morrow & M. Pressley (Eds.),
Best Practices in Literacy Instruction (pp. 11-29). New York: The Guilford Press.
Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2007). Differentiated Instructional Strategies. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Kame’enui, E. J., Fuchs, L., Francis, D. J., Good, R. III, O’Connor, R. E., Simmons, D. C.,
Tindal, G., & Torgesen, J. K. (2006). The Adequacy of Tools for Assessing Reading
Competence: A Framework and Review. Educational Researcher 35(4), 3-11.
Kapusnick, R. A. & Hauslein, C. M. (2001). The ‘Silver Cup’ of Differentiated Instruction.
Kappa Delta Pi Record 37(4), 156-159.
Levy, Holly M. (2008). Meeting the Needs of All Students through Differentiated Instruction:
Helping Every Child Reach and Exceed Standards. The Clearing House 81(4), 161-164.
Mathes, P. G., Torgesen, J. K., Clancy-Mencheti, J., Santi, K., Nicholas, K., Robinson, C., &
Grek, M. (2003). A Comparison of Teacher-Directed Versus Peer-Assisted Instruction to
Struggling First-Grade Readers. The Elementary School Journal 103(5), 459-479.
Morrow, L. M., Tracey, D. H. (2007). Best Practices in Early Literacy Development in
Preschool, Kindergarten, and First Grade. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M. Morrow & M. Pressley
(Eds.), Best Practices in Literacy Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
Poole, Deborah. (2005). Interactional Differentiation in the Mixed-Ability Group: A Situated
View of Two Struggling Readers. Reading Research Quarterly 43(3), 228-250.
Reutzel, D. Ray. (2007). Organizing Effective Literacy Instruction: Differentiating Instruction to
Meet the Needs of All Children. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M. Morrow & M. Pressley (Eds.), Best
Practices in Literacy Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
Reading Instruction
25
Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A Framework for
Differentiating Classroom Instruction. Preventing School Failure 52(2), 31-47.
Routman, Regie. (2003). Reading Essentials. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Tomlinson, Carol Ann. (2001). How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, Carol Ann. (2002). Different Learners, Different Lessons. Instructor 112(2), 21,
24-26, 91.
Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K.,
Conover, L. A., Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating Instruction in Response to Student
Readiness, Interest, and Learning Profile in Academically Diverse Classrooms: A Review of
Literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 27(2-3), 119-145.
Tomlinson, Carol Ann. (2005). Traveling the Road to Differentiation in Staff Development.
Journal of Staff Development 26(4), 8-12.
Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2007). Differentiated Reading Instruction. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Wilson, E. V., Dellinger, M., Green, A., Murphy, J., Hatfield, M., Long, C., & Fantozzi, V.
(2008). Improving Reading Skills of Second Grade Students: Integrating Accountability and
Assessment in Elementary School Reading Instruction with a Preservice Teacher Education
Class. Educational Planning 17(2), 41-46.