{"id":5131,"date":"2026-07-04T15:46:27","date_gmt":"2026-07-04T13:46:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/?p=5131"},"modified":"2026-07-05T13:51:21","modified_gmt":"2026-07-05T11:51:21","slug":"how-to-close-achievement-gaps-without-resorting-to-differentiated-instruction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/2026\/07\/04\/how-to-close-achievement-gaps-without-resorting-to-differentiated-instruction\/","title":{"rendered":"How to close achievement gaps without resorting to differentiated instruction"},"content":{"rendered":"

Haga clic aqu\u00ed para la traducci\u00f3n al espa\u00f1ol (Google Translate)<\/a><\/p>\n

Within-class differentiated instruction, whereby teachers prepare additional resources & multiple “mini lessons” for sub-groups of students in each class, is regularly promoted by initial teacher education & teacher CPD programmes to close achievement gaps. However, it has little evidence of efficacy & imposes substantial additional workloads & classroom management issues on teachers. What are the alternatives? What more effective ways to reduce achievement gaps are there? Here are four strategies; explicit instruction, extension resources, response to intervention (RTI), & more specific placement testing; that will likely produce better results & less exhausted teachers if adequately implemented.<\/b><\/p>\n

Prevention is better than cure<\/h3>\n

Explicit instruction will better ensure that all<\/i> students learn & succeed rather than only the ones who have more prior knowledge &\/or have better developed executive functions (studying abilities). However, there’s a large caveat with this: explicit instruction in what? If the curriculum focuses on grammar & vocabulary as abstract concepts to be memorised & applied, i.e. as in the vast majority of EFL curricula, we cannot expect better results from more of the same. Therefore, transitioning to meaning-focused, usage-based models of language learning such genre-based instruction &\/or pedagogical construction grammar, is prerequisite as I have argued elsewhere on this blog.<\/p>\n

Extension resources<\/h3>\n

Providing additional, more challenging (but not novel) practice activities so that more proficient students can better consolidate what they’ve learnt, systematically prepared in advance by a competent instructional designer, often as an “extension booklet.” However, teachers should beware of “fast finisher” students that may have rushed through the main class activities without sufficient depth & conscientiousness to really benefit from them. Simply finishing the work isn’t a guarantee of learning; quality of student effort & depth of meaningful language processing matters as much as quantity of work completed or produced.<\/p>\n

Response to Intervention (RTI)<\/h3>\n

This is the most resource-intensive (i.e. expensive) strategy & so is not as frequently implemented as it should be. Essentially, the teacher teaches, the students learn & practice, & then the teacher assesses how well they’ve learnt. So far so good. Then, those students who shown up in the screening as underperforming to such a degree that they require additional instruction are sent for additional tuition (on that specific content & those specific learning objectives), either in small groups or individually, so that they can catch up with the rest of the class. However, efficacy depends on the quality of initial instruction (see explicit instruction above), appropriateness of screening, & quality of subsequent instruction, i.e. the necessary & sufficient additional instruction rather than “busy work,” which can feel more like a punishment for falling behind than support for catching up. As much thought, planning, & preparation needs to go into additional instruction as for initial, whole class instruction.<\/p>\n

More specific ability grouping<\/h3>\n

Typically, English language students are allocated to groups\/classes according to their performance on placement tests &, typically, many ELT departments & academies use general grammar & vocabulary multiple choice item tests, short answer questions, & brief writing tasks that have little in common with the types of tasks, genres of text, or rhetorical functions that would be prerequisite to success in the given curriculum (AKA “misrepresenting the construct”). In other words, students benefit from being given placement tests for the specific curricula, i.e. tasks, genres of text, & rhetorical functions, that they are being screened for. Ask yourself, how well will this placement test predict a students’ success on this particular course? Again, this is more preventing issues in the first place rather than retro-actively trying to address them when they arise further down the line. Also, bear in mind that most secure English language tests (SELTs) required for entry into EMI programmes do not reflect the tasks, genres of text, or rhetorical functions that students need to succeed in their degree programmes, e.g. writing from sources or participation in tutorial seminars are rarely, if ever, included in SELT assessment constructs.<\/p>\n

Conclusion: Work smarter not harder<\/h3>\n

So, teachers endlessly planning & preparing parallel lessons for differentiated groups in every class is exhausting, ineffective, & arguably counter-productive, i.e. teachers’ & students’ time & energy could be spent on more productive activities (AKA “opportunity cost”). Alternatively, more systematic, planned, prepared, & preventative strategies which impose less additional work on teachers, such as well-informed explicit instruction, expertly designed & context specific extension resources, RTI, & curriculum-specific placement testing can raise the quality of students’ language learning experiences & close achievement gaps.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Haga clic aqu\u00ed para la traducci\u00f3n al espa\u00f1ol (Google Translate) Within-class differentiated instruction, whereby teachers prepare additional resources & multiple “mini lessons” for sub-groups of students in each class, is regularly promoted by initial teacher education & teacher CPD programmes to close achievement gaps. However, it has little evidence of efficacy & imposes substantial additional… Continue reading How to close achievement gaps without resorting to differentiated instruction<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5133,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[117,118,119,123,7,120,128,127,135],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5131"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5139,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5131\/revisions\/5139"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5133"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5131"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5131"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/matbury.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5131"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}