FIAE+B2+Chapter+5

Abstract and Synthesis - Jonathan
**Abstract:** Chapter five of Rick Wormeli's Fair Isn't Always Equal discusses the "[|tiering]" of assessments. Tiering refers to adjusting assessments according to student performance level. The author prefers to refer to this concept as "ratcheting" assignments up or down based on preparedness level. Proper use of tiering is a very effective method of differentiation. Effective tiering requires several things. Firstly, tiering of an assessment must be focused so as to keep within sight of learning objectives. The author also includes many guidelines and suggestions for ratcheting assignments. The author suggests a variety of formats for tiering, an example of which is the RAFT model. RAFT stands for Role, Audience, Format, and Topic--or Time. A teacher can adjust the specificity of these components of RAFT depending on skill level. RAFT is a model for students to choose different topic-based elements in order to create a unique task.

**Synthesis:** This is a concept that everyone needs to employ in order to differentiate. It is also an agreeable, common sense strategy. The strategy is very student-friendly, not in that it makes things "easier" but that it brings the learning directly to the student's level. This is recognized as a strategy used for moving forward, and not some sort of handicap. It is also a useful strategy for assessing students who are simply not acquainted with the material as they should be from a prior course. There were plenty of examples provided in the chapter to select from, supporting all subjects--based on the responses, people were tending to find certain examples that corresponded well with their concentration. You may wonder how to practically implement this in the classroom, and this [|video] shows a teacher returning a tiered assessment in the classroom. toc

Tiarra
While “tiering” may be the more commonly used term, Wormeli prefers the term “ratcheting” to describe the way in which teachers adjust assignments and assessments. Ratcheting refers to the increase or decrease in the level of challenge to meet a student’s readiness level in a subject area. It is important to remember that ratcheting does not have to do with assigning more or less work to a student depending on their ability, but rather increasing the complexity and challenge of an assignment while still holding each individual student to the same goals and expectations. In chapter 5 Wormeli provides several helpful lists, examples, strategies and formats of how one can achieve just that. I personally enjoyed the Tic-Tac-Toe board design of tiering because it also allows the students some autonomy in their schoolwork. It is also pointed out that a teacher should not tier every assignment and that students frequently can complete the same work, especially when being held to the same standard expectation. By tiering, or “ratcheting” assignments, teachers can effectively reach students at all levels of proficiency.

Will L.
The fifth chapter of FIAE is about tiering assessment. This is defined as adjusting the assessment of certain students, so that the students who have a better understanding of material are not assessed the same as those who may struggle with certain content. I like this idea, so everyone is assessed equally, but more so in relation to their strengths and working on defining their weaknesses. This adjustment of assessment can and should be implemented by teachers because it allows students to not be too overwhelmed or underwhelmed. It assures that everyone will be learning at their own pace.

Justin C.
This chapter of the book talks about ways in which teachers can tier their assignments to allow the flexibility to those students who are excelling or those who are falling behind, or may just not have as much pre-knowledge as the other students. Being concentrated in mathematics, the example to start off the chapter stuck right out at me. It was talking about graphing inequalities and how to adjust that to different skill levels. It mentioned that having a baseline, or standard, to which all students should be able to do, like solve an equation for y. If students are excelling at that process, perhaps change the assignment to need them to find inverses, which switches the x and y variables and have them solve an equation that way. Also, graphing and shading could be added to help understand which points would satisfy the specific equation. For those who do not have as much pre-knowledge, the assignment could be made so that the initial equation is already solved for y and students can focus on learning how and where the graphs are coming from as well as why a certain part is shaded in. Also, the concept of //greater (or less) than or equal to// could be saved for those who are more advanced. It is all about being able to cater to the needs of students so that all of them get what skills are necessary to move forward.

Grace K.
Chapter 5 described “tiering” assessments to offer more or less challenging work for varying skill sets. By tiering assessments, teachers can avoid a common but ineffective solution to different skill levels in one classroom; assigning struggling students less work and able students more work. This solution may make the teacher feel as if they are doing something to accommodate these varying skill levels, but the method is anything but effective. Instead, Wormeli writes that teachers should put energy into tiering assessments; creating assessments that are simpler and more straightforward for “early readiness levels” and focusing on more complex assignments to accommodate “advanced readiness levels.” The chapter also offered guidelines for how to do this, which were very useful. One of these guidelines was that when teachers are tiering assignments, they should start with the early readiness assignments and work their way up. By doing this, a teacher can make sure that they are ultimately designing assessments to address essential knowledge, and they can simply “ratchet up” the challenge level when adapting the assessment for higher readiness levels. This ensures that all students are doing valuable work. Other suggested tools for tiering included increasing complexity (Wormeli offered a list on pages 57-58 with great suggestions on how to do this), creating learning contracts, using learning menus and tic tac toe boards, cubing, summarization pyramids, William’s Taxonomy of Creativity, RAFTS (Role, Audience, Format, Topic/Time) assignments, etc. I had not heard of any of these methods before reading this chapter, so felt it really valuable to learn about all of them and how to utilize them in a classroom.

Dan B.
Chapter five talked about tiering assessment. Tiering assessment is when you give your students different assignments based on skill level. You can give one of three skill levels. The first skill level is early readiness level which is when you give really basic material because the student does not have any background in the subject; you want to give them a taste of it before you make it really challenging. The second level is when the student is at their grade level, this means that the student has some background but not a lot. The last level is when the student is at an advances level, this means that the student is not only familiar with the subject matter but they excel at it and can do it beyond their grade level. It is important to start kids off at the skill level that they are at; if you go above their skill level then they will become frustrated and will not learn anything. You also want to keep pushing them, once they have gotten good at the early readiness level you need to push them to their grade level and so on. The object is to make sure the student is proficient, and by using tiering assessment you can help students become proficient.

Danny K.
Chapter five covered tiering assessments. I had never heard of a tiering assessment until reading this chapter. The book defines tiering on page 56 as, “how teachers adjust assignments and assessments according to student’s readiness levels, interests, and learner profiles.” Not only does this chapter tell what a tiering assessment is, but it also goes into depth on how to use it. In my classroom I would try to use tiering assessments instead of just giving my advanced students more work and my less advanced students less work. Tiering assessments seem like they would be harder to make than other assignments, however they can be very effective. The “Tic-Tac-Toe Boards” jumped out to me and would be something I would like to use in my classroom because it gives students a choice in the tasks they do.

Jen R.
Chapter five of FIAE is mainly focused around the idea of tiering. Without any prior experience of tiering, this concept is rather difficult to grasp. From what I could gather, tiering involves different levels of assessments or assignments through teacher development. It is when teachers become accustomed with the needs of each individual student and adjust their teaching methods accordingly. When using the tiering concept within a classroom, it is important that the students have a clear understanding of their expected achievements. To ensure that my students know exactly what is expected of them, I will use the contract idea suggested within chapter five. A signed contract signed by my student will provide as a mutual agreement of what we want to accomplish over the course of a unit. Overall, a majority of the concepts described within this chapter were unfamiliar to me and I enjoyed learning something new.

Grady B.
In this chapter of //FIAE//, the author described methods by which an educator could tier assignments and work around the needs and readiness of specific students. For me, this concept is the most difficult regard DI theory; deciding how to alter work for certain students while being fair to both their potential and the other students in the classroom doing more difficult work. This chapter does a good job, though, of describing ways to keep instruction fair to all students. I especially like the idea of a mutually determined learning contract between the student and teacher, where both come to an agreement about the needs of that students and the manner in which to meet those needs. The exercise reminds me of a sort of informal IEP, and I feel that a student would be more inclined to be active in class if that student feels that they have a direct voice in establishing the ways in which they will gain mastery. I also see the practical use of a “learning menu,” as described on page 62, where students are given a structured system where they can exercise some autonomy in the ways in which they are going to learn.

Tyler S
Tiering can give a greater challenge to more advanced students, while at the same time allowing weaker students to keep up. This cannot be used in all cases, and if done poorly, can have some bad results. In school, I always wished I didn’t have to sit around waiting for other students on material I found incredibly easy. However, if a teacher gave me something harder, and then the grades reflected it, I got quite angry. It isn’t fair to me that I would get a lower grade than a slower student when, given the same assignment, I could have outperformed him easily. The problem there is that more important than learning is grades. I have had one teacher in my past who didn’t grade our work, but during a few periods in every grading period, he graded us based on how he felt we were learning. He worked closely one on one with each of us at some time, and gauged us that way. It was an AP class, and he wanted us to actually learn, and not care about the grades. If we asked for a higher grade, in many cases he would gladly give you a higher overall grade if you could answer a few questions.

Chris D.
Chapter 5 talks about the idea of tiering assignments based on performance level. For example, when first tiering an assignment, it’s important to always start at grade level and then manipulate the complexity of it based on the skills that the students have or don’t have compared to the skills needed to complete an assignment. If they have the skills required then increase the complexity. If they don’t possess it or it’s not fully mastered yet, decrease the complexity. In a math class, if students have mastered factoring, I’ll challenge them even further by giving them equations which cannot be factored by traditional methods, but require the use of the quadratic formula in order to solve. Tiering isn’t something that should be done all the time, but rather only when it’s absolutely needed. A way of tiering that can motivate students can be done by learning menus. Here, students choose from a variety of different “appetizers”, “entrees”, “side dishes”, and “desserts” that the teacher has compiled into a restaurant type of menu. The tiering comes into play where students get to “build their own meal”, where they choose which items they wish to complete from each category (possibly each category having a different level of difficulty). I can see myself incorporating this idea in a project where students will have to choose which type of algebraic problem they want to solve. This will give students some autonomy in the classroom, which is important when it comes to teaching.

Kaitlin T.
As suggested by its title, chapter five discusses tiering assessments and/or assignments for students, varying in difficulty and ability. It simply wouldn’t make sense to have an advanced learner working at the pace of a student who has difficulties understanding certain material. At the same time, tiering allows educators to avoid the problem of assigning more advanced students more work, and students with less advancement less work. In these circumstances educators should tier or “ratchet” (Dr. Carol Ann Tomlinson) their curriculum to fit the readiness of their students. Educators should plan their curriculum at the desired level and then adjust from there. Learning contracts, which are created by the teacher with input from the student, allow a student to obtain the same goals, but via a different process or “journey.” As an educator, it is my responsibility to make sure my students are performing at a level that is appropriate for them. By use of tiering and creating of learning contracts, my students should be on the right track to succeed.

Jonathan B.
Chapter 5 discusses the tiering of assessments and expectations. The chapter mentions that one should begin tiering //at// the standard, and not below it. Starting lower or higher than the standard will distort the expectations for performance of the given grade level. Tiering should stay within sight of the goal of the standard. I can see how this is important. It is imperative that tiering remained focused. In the case of an Honors level tier, one could go on educational “jaunts” so as to satisfy the higher desire and need for content, and because you started off that way, it may consume more time and energy. Eventually, students' understanding and effort strays off the path of the standards. The same could happen with lower-level tiers, in that one could spend so much time tending to the expectations and outcomes below the standard that there is never a chance to “work up” to the standard. In my classes, I will be sure to check my “tiers” for focus, and appropriate level. I will also be sure to discern correctly when to use tiering and when not to.