# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Winter 2000
Differentiating Instruction

Finding Manageable Ways to Meet Individual Needs

Scott Willis and Larry Mann

Differentiated instruction is a teaching philosophy based on the premise that teachers should adapt instruction to student differences. Rather than marching students through the curriculum in lockstep, teachers should modify their instruction to meet students' varying readiness levels, learning preferences, and interests.

Differentiated instruction is not a new concept, experts say. Back in the days of the one-room schoolhouse, when students ages 6-16 learned together, differentiated instruction "was how they did school," notes Carol Ann Tomlinson, an associate professor at the University of Virginia and author of the 1999 ASCD book The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners.

The need to differentiate instruction is obvious, proponents say. "We want to accommodate the full diversity of academic needs" that students bring to the classroom, says Susan Demirsky Allan, assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction for the Grosse Pointe, Mich., public schools. "We know those differences are out there, and we have to recognize that reality," Allan says. "Teachers can't assume they have 25 clones sitting in front of them." Without differentiated instruction, any child who varies from the norm will suffer, she contends.

Traditional schools are "designed for organized, left-brain learners who are book lovers," says Donna Strigari, principal of Frank J. Smith School in East Hanover, N.J., and cofacilitator of ASCD's network on differentiated instruction. This type of learner, however, represents only one-quarter of the population, Strigari says. To meet the needs of all students, educators need to "break the old patterns" of teaching and change perceptions of what school should be like, she asserts.

Living Our Beliefs

Nearly all teachers believe that it's better to differentiate instruction, experts agree-but the challenge lies in translating that belief into action. According to Tomlinson, teachers can differentiate three aspects of the curriculum: content, process, and products.

Content refers to the concepts, principles, and skills that teachers want students to learn. All students should be given access to the same core content, Tomlinson believes. Struggling learners should be taught the same big ideas as their classmates, not given watered-down content.
"Teachers should address the same concepts with all students but adjust the degree of complexity," Tomlinson emphasizes. "The same concept can be explained in a way that's comprehensible to a very young child or in a way that challenges a Ph.D. candidate." To illustrate this point, she cites the example of a professor whom she observed teaching Shakespearean sonnets-with great success-to 1st graders.
Content also refers to the means teachers use to give students access to skills and knowledge, such as texts, lectures, demonstrations, and field trips. Teachers can vary these vehicles as well, Tomlinson says. For example, a teacher might direct an advanced learner to complex texts, Web sites, and experts to interview, while providing a student of more modest capacity with reading buddies, videos, demonstrations, and "organizers that distill information and make it more accessible."

Process refers to the activities that help students make sense of, and come to own, the ideas and skills being taught. Teachers can modify these activities, Tomlinson advises, to provide some students with more complexity and others with more scaffolding, depending on their readiness levels. (Examples of scaffolding include step-by-step directions, reteaching, and additional models.) Like content, process can be varied by student interest and learning preferences as well.

Products refers to culminating projects that allow students to demonstrate and extend what they have learned. Products reveal whether students can apply learning beyond the classroom to solve problems and take action. Different students can create different products, Tomlinson suggests, based on their readiness levels, interests, and learning preferences. For example, some students might work alone on a product, while others might work in groups.

This approach-differentiating content, process, and products-requires teachers to be "crystal clear" about what they are trying to teach, Tomlinson says. "Often, that's where we miss the boat."

Moreover, the curriculum needs to be based on broad concepts, Allan says. If it's based on "factoids," then differentiation will be very difficult, she cautions.

What Are the Strategies?

Teachers who differentiate instruction rely on a number of strategies to make it feasible, experts say. "There's not one miracle thing that works for every child," says Patricia Woodin- Weaver, an education consultant and counseling psychologist from East Hanover, N.J., who cofacilitates ASCD's network on differentiated instruction. "You need a range of strategies." Network members have used strategies such as cooperative learning, multi-age grouping, and addressing multiple intelligences, Woodin-Weaver says.

Flexible grouping is essentially a must, experts agree. "If you don't use flexible grouping, it's almost impossible to differentiate instruction," Allan says. Trying to vary instruction without grouping students is simply too "unwieldy."

Teachers can vary whole-class instruction by teaching small groups or individual students, Tomlinson suggests. Students can be grouped based on readiness, interest, or learning profile. And, she points out, groups don't necessarily have to be homogeneous. A teacher might group students with a similar readiness level (e.g., for reading instruction) or with a dissimilar one (e.g., to discuss a book they all love).

Another helpful strategy is using "tiered activities," where the teacher keeps the concepts and skills the same for all students but provides "routes of access" that vary in terms of complexity, abstractness, and open-endedness, Tomlinson says. Other strategies include using stations, compacting, and agendas (see box, "Strategies for Differentiating Instruction").

Strategies for Differentiating Instruction

Stations. Using stations involves setting up different spots in the classroom where students work on various tasks simultaneously. These stations invite flexible grouping because not all students need to go to all stations all the time.

Compacting. This strategy encourages teachers to assess students before beginning a unit of study or development of a skill. Students who do well on the preassessment do not continue work on what they already know.

Agendas. These are personalized lists of tasks that a student must complete in a specified time, usually two to three weeks. Student agendas throughout a class will have similar and dissimilar elements.

Complex Instruction. This strategy uses challenging materials, open-ended tasks, and small instructional groups. Teachers move among the groups as they work, asking students questions and probing their thinking.

Orbital Studies. These independent investigations, generally lasting three to six weeks, revolve around some facet of the curriculum. Students select their own topics, and they work with guidance and coaching from the teacher.

Entry Points. This strategy from Howard Gardner proposes student exploration of a given topic through as many as five avenues: narrational (presenting a story), logical-quantitative (using numbers or deduction), foundational (examining philosophy and vocabulary), aesthetic (focusing on sensory features), and experiential (hands-on).

Problem-Based Learning. This strategy places students in the active role of solving problems in much the same way adult professionals perform their jobs.

Choice Boards. With this strategy, work assignments are written on cards that are placed in hanging pockets. By asking a student to select a card from a particular row of pockets, the teacher targets work toward student needs yet allows student choice.

4MAT. Teachers who use 4MAT plan instruction for each of four learning preferences over the course of several days on a given topic. Thus, some lessons focus on mastery, some on understanding, some on personal involvement, and some on synthesis. As a result, each learner has a chance to approach the topic through preferred modes and also to strengthen weaker areas.

In the Elementary Classroom

Teachers from kindergarten to 12th grade are making use of these strategies in their classrooms, experts say. At the elementary level, teachers are using differentiated instruction to ensure that all of their students learn foundational skills.

First grade teachers Gail Canova and Lena Contey at Frank J. Smith School in East Hanover, N.J., use supported reading activities to help young learners of various abilities strengthen reading skills. On Mondays, Canova and Contey read stories to the entire class but break the class into groups according to challenge levels for the next three days. On Fridays, the whole class reviews the story once more to measure improvement and reinforce learning.

To help students of differing abilities improve writing skills, Canova and Contey have established peer tutoring groups. In the groups, children read their work aloud and help one another with spelling and editing as they create their own books. A writing activity that differentiates on the basis of student interest is the monthly class newsletter, for which the children write stories independently on topics of their choice. Students love to see their names in print, both teachers note.

Pat Rutz, a 1st and 2nd grade teacher at Abbot Elementary School in Ann Arbor, Mich., differentiates for advanced learners by using curriculum compacting. If some of her students have mastered the concept of place value, for example, they can pursue higher-level math work independently while she works with the rest of the class, she explains.

To be ready for young learners whose abilities outrun the rest of the class or who need extra help, Rutz has prepared "math boxes" that offer activities aimed above and below grade-level expectations for each math concept. During any lesson, "everybody's doing the same work," she points out, "but at different levels of complexity. Everyone works on something that's going to move them ahead."

At Riverheads Elementary School in Staunton, Va., 4th grade teacher Laurie Biser differentiates math lessons according to processes. Some students work better with paper and pencils, some need manipulatives, and some learn best at the computer. "I have one student who uses a laptop computer all the time because of a writing disability," she says.

Because 4th graders must memorize multiplication facts and Biser knows that not everyone has the same skill at memorizing, she asks her students, "How do you think you could learn this best?" She finds that the activities students prefer are usually a key to how they learn most efficiently, so she often lets them choose whether to draw, write, use flash cards with a partner, or create three-dimensional models.

Biser also uses contracts as a means to differentiate instruction. Creating contracts requires a lot of advance work, she notes, but once the contracts are ready, students like them because they get to make choices according to interest and ability. For learning spelling words, Biser provides her students with contracts that list as many as 40 or 50 different activities, each worth between 10 and 20 points, depending on the level of activity. Students select their own spelling activities and have a week to complete their contracts with their work stapled to them. "This puts them in control of the grade they want to receive for their work," explains Biser.

Teacher Penny Shockley at Ephesus Elementary School in Chapel Hill, N.C., uses tiered assignments to engage her 5th graders at all levels of ability. When she begins the unit on perimeter, area, and volume, Shockley first presents a short, hands-on lesson that defines the whole-class objective and lays the foundation for individual practice. Together, she and the students measure various sizes of cereal boxes so that everyone is clear about definitions and processes.

Then, in groups of two, students receive activity packets. The more concrete learners receive packets with worksheets that direct them to measure their own desks and classroom furniture. In this highly structured activity, students practice calculating the perimeters, areas, and volumes of things they can actually see and touch. Shockley is on hand to offer help and to extend the activity, for those who are ready, by helping students find a way to arrange the desks so that they have the smallest possible perimeter.

Other students with greater abstract reasoning skills receive packets that direct them to design their own bedrooms. In this more complex and independent assignment, students use their creativity to define the dimensions of an imaginary bedroom and to create scale drawings. They also calculate the cost and number of five-yard rolls of wallpaper borders needed to decorate their rooms. From catalogs, they select furniture and rugs that will fit into their model rooms. These details provide extensive practice, beginning with such tasks as determining how many square feet of floor space remain uncovered. This open-ended assignment offers higher-ability students an opportunity to extend their learning as far as they want to take it.

"My job is to determine what each child needs, and it isn't the same for everyone," says Shockley. She notes that all students have the opportunity to earn A s within their own level of challenge.

At the Secondary Level

Teachers in middle schools and high schools are also using strategies for differentiating instruction, experts say. Wendy Raymond, 6th grade language arts teacher at Tappan Middle School in Ann Arbor, Mich., asks her students to select one of 30 thematically related books that she introduces. Then she groups students who are interested in the same titles, usually about four or five students per group, and teaches them how to function as a literature circle-students learn the roles of discussion directors, connectors (students who make connections to things in the real world), illustrators, literary luminaries (students who point out great figurative language), and vocabulary enrichers (those who identify words that most students might not know). With each new book, students regroup and jobs rotate, but each group sets its own schedule for discussions and assignments.

When Raymond's students come together for whole-class activities, they explore themes common to all of the books, followed by assignments that might require students to create their own short literary work that typifies the genre they have just studied. "The idea is to get kids to stretch themselves," says Raymond. "They can go as far with this as they want, and there are lots of different opportunities for achievement according to interest."

At Phillips Middle School in Chapel Hill, N.C., some of Rob Frescoln's 7th grade science students read at a 2nd grade level and others can handle college texts. To help all his students succeed with research papers, Frescoln provides science texts at several reading levels and uses mixed-ability groupings.

Each of five students in a mixed-ability group might research a different cell part by gathering information from books at her own reading level. Then groups split up so that all students with the same cell assignment compare notes and teach one another. Finally, students return to their original groups so that every member of each group can report to the others and learn about the other cell parts. "It's the coolest thing in the world to see a lower-ability kid teaching a higher-ability kid what he's learned," says Frescoln. This approach to differentiation helps motivate all students to push themselves just a little further, he says.

At Brownell Middle School in Grosse Pointe Farms, Mich., science teacher Marie DeLuca offers tiered assignments to help her 8th graders understand the concept of density. To start everyone off on the same foot, DeLuca uses an introductory lab activity that allows the whole class to compare the differing weights of identical volumes of sand and oil. The object is to determine whether a ship could carry the same amount of sand as it could oil, and how this manifests the property of density.

From this starting point, DeLuca assigns students an Internet activity that explores the causes of the sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald-but at different levels of synthesis and analysis, depending on student ability. Homework assignments ask higher-ability students to design cargo boats, grade-level students to float an egg, and below-level students to determine which is more dense: a can of Classic Coke or a can of Diet Coke. They must perform a water displacement experiment to come up with the correct answer.

All students complete lab reports that DeLuca evaluates using a rubric. Analytical writing is the most important element of the rubric, but students can earn an A grade as long as they support their conclusions with evidence found in their own particular assignments. The tests DeLuca gives are also differentiated according to the tiered homework and lab activities. "It wouldn't be fair for everyone to do the same assignment and the same test," says DeLuca, "because everyone has different talents. The important thing is for everyone to have a certain degree of challenge."

At Quince Orchard High School in Gaithersburg, Md., social studies teacher Leon Bushe uses mock trials to differentiate instruction for 10th graders in his national, state, and local government class. Even though this is an honors class, Bushe finds that there is a wide variance in abilities, so he tries to differentiate instruction according to interest, task, and readiness. He finds that mock trials offer opportunities for all three modes of differentiation.

Dividing his class of 30 into three groups of 10, Bushe gives each group a court case involving a legal concept such as beyond a reasonable doubt. Students choose whether to be lawyers, witnesses, or defendants-whichever they feel most comfortable with. Every student has at least two roles, because each trial group also serves as the jury for another trial group. To prepare for their roles, students must complete individualized reading and writing assignments, but they all learn the basics of trial by jury.

One factor of Bushe's mock trials that heightens interest is that each jury deliberates in a fishbowl environment-that is, the rest of the class gets to observe the deliberations but may not speak or interfere. "When the jury goes off on a tangent or misinterprets something," says Bushe, "you see the lawyers on the edges of their chairs, almost ready to burst. But of course, they can't say anything."

The mock trials require a good deal of extra preparation because so many students have unique assignments and roles. But Bushe insists that by differentiating, "you're guaranteeing that more kids will understand what you're doing."

Making It Happen

Asking teachers to differentiate instruction raises a host of issues, experts freely admit- time, classroom management, and grading, among others. In the face of these challenges, how can an administrator encourage teachers to move in this direction?

"An administrator has to become knowledgeable about differentiation, both the philosophy and the classroom implications," says Allan. Administrators also need to provide "flexibility of funds" so teachers can use a variety of resources and are not stuck with one textbook. But "the critical factor is [sustained] staff development," Allan emphasizes. "You don't learn to differentiate instruction in a one-afternoon workshop."

At the school or district level, "you really need a person who guides the effort," Allan adds-someone who aligns staff development, curriculum, materials selection, and methodology. "It's a Herculean task administratively, but it's worth it," she says. "It's what we should be doing for kids."

In her role as staff development coordinator for the Rockwood, Mo., school district, Sue McAdamis has seen many teachers warm up to differentiated instruction. Three years ago, when she started pitching the idea to elementary teachers, McAdamis met with "terrible resistance." But when a cadre of interested teachers were trained and began doing peer coaching, "that really put it in place," she says. "Those people became our critical mass." Today, differentiated instruction is "business as usual" in the district's elementary schools, she says.

When McAdamis broached the idea to middle school teachers, "they almost threw me out," she recalls. The teachers objected, saying that they lacked time, that they were dealing with large class sizes, and that differentiation ran counter to the middle school philosophy. "They were worried about tracking," McAdamis explains.

Differentiated instruction is not a form of tracking, Tomlinson states; it is "intended to be the exact opposite." Teachers must give every child access to the curriculum and ensure that every child makes progress, she says.

McAdamis notes that some of the middle school teachers who were initially the biggest resisters have become the biggest supporters. One science teacher was dragged into differentiated instruction "kicking and screaming," she says. Then the teacher tried a tiered activity and was stunned by the outcome. "For the first time ever," the teacher said afterward, "all of my kids understood the concept."

Principals are the key to making implementation work, McAdamis says. Principals' attitudes and the amount of support they provide are critical. In her district, principals have found money to hire substitutes, allowing teachers to make school visits and do peer coaching. "It's very helpful if principals attend staff development training," she adds.

Bob Bateman, principal of Riverheads Elementary School in Staunton, Va., took a three-credit university course on differentiating instruction as part of his district's effort to ensure that all students would receive appropriate instruction. Two staff members from each school took the course, then led staff development activities at their respective schools, he says.

At Riverheads, each teacher was asked to create or modify a unit of instruction in keeping with the principles of differentiated instruction. Bateman gave the teachers feedback on their units, then met with them again after they had taught the units. "I tried to stay really involved with it," he says.

Bateman also helped develop two sample units-one on oceans, one on regions of the United States-that were given to teachers as a guide. Through creating these sample units, "we learned a tremendous amount," he says. Similarly, McAdamis has compiled a book of teacher-developed activities and lessons that represent "best practices" in differentiated instruction.

A Challenge Worth Meeting

No one claims that differentiating instruction is easy. "There's no question that it's a big challenge," Woodin-Weaver says, "but there's no bigger challenge than trying to insert kids in a one-size-fits-all [classroom] and then having to deal with the spillover of emotional and behavioral reactions. If kids are not in a place where they can learn, they let us know loud and clear," she says.

Teachers are inspired to persevere with differentiated instruction when they see the results, Allan says. Students are more engaged and make more rapid progress. Bright students are no longer bored, and struggling students are finding learning more accessible-and hence their sense of self-efficacy is rising. In response, "I see veteran teachers becoming energized, and new teachers becoming enormously excited," Allan says. As one veteran teacher told her: "This differentiation is exhausting, frustrating, and time-consuming-and I would never go back to the old way."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Winter 2000 Differentiating Instruction Finding Manageable Ways to Meet Individual Needs Scott Willis and Larry Mann Differentiated instruction is a teaching philosophy based on the premise that teachers should adapt instruction to student differences. Rather than marching students through the curriculum in lockstep, teachers should modify their instruction to meet students' varying readiness levels, learning preferences, and interests.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are now being held accountable through standardized testing in most states. Instructors are bound by a strict curriculum that is tested on at the end of each course/year. Teachers are now adapting to this by aligning curriculum with individual student's needs. This idea could enhance the Direct Instuction model with features an instructor-led lesson with differentiation based on student needs.Students are now being evaluated on an individual basis and teachers are identifying what each student needs specific work on and teachers are adapting (Kilbane & Milman, 2014).

# data[].attributes.body
With the availability of research through online databases, students are able to access information where ever internet connection is available. Teachers can not implement research in all assignments, strengthening students' ability to reference work. Students are also able to prepare themselves for the "real world" because of the added resource availability. Incorporating new vocabulary and cognitive processes when forming plans  can be done through added information (Kilbane & Milman, 2014). This idea could contribute to the Inductive model and make it significantly better. Teachers would be able to have students realize patters of a concept through their research.

# data[].attributes.body
Instructors can revamp old lesson plans by implementing technology. Utilizing Google tools such as  Docs, Sheets, or Slides allows for students to interact while presenting their work through a new platform. There is a rise in laptop/tablet use in classrooms. Students could follow presentations in class through their personal tools. Technology-based lessons would be able to enhance the Integrative model. Students would be able to be more independent as well as organize information through technology.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Apr 28, 2017 ... Yes! You finally got your brand new and shiny iPad for the classroom! There's only one tiny (read: enormous) problem. There's one iPad and there are 25 students. So how are you going to use this iPad? Don't worry. There are so many apps you can use in your one- iPad classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview

Three-quarters of AP and NWP teachers say that the internet and digital search tools have had a "mostly positive" impact on their students' research habits, but 87% say these technologies are creating an "easily distracted generation with short attention spans" and 64% say today's digital technologies "do more to distract students than to help them academically."

These complex and at times contradictory judgments emerge from 1) an online survey of more than 2,000 middle and high school teachers drawn from the Advanced Placement (AP) and National Writing Project (NWP) communities; and 2) a series of online and offline focus groups with middle and high school teachers and some of their students. The study was designed to explore teachers' views of the ways today's digital environment is shaping the research and writing habits of middle and high school students. Building on the Pew Internet Project's prior work about how people use the internet and, especially, the information-saturated digital lives of teens, this research looks at teachers' experiences and observations about how the rise of digital material affects the research skills of today's students.

Overall, teachers who participated in this study characterize the impact of today's digital environment on their students' research habits and skills as mostly positive, yet multi-faceted and not without drawbacks. Among the more positive impacts they see: the best students access a greater depth and breadth of information on topics that interest them; students can take advantage of the availability of educational material in engaging multimedia formats; and many become more self-reliant researchers.

At the same time, these teachers juxtapose these benefits against some emerging concerns. Specifically, some teachers worry about students' overdependence on search engines; the difficulty many students have judging the quality of online information; the general level of literacy of today's students; increasing distractions pulling at students and poor time management skills; students' potentially diminished critical thinking capacity; and the ease with which today's students can borrow from the work of others.

These teachers report that students rely mainly on search engines to conduct research, in lieu of other resources such as online databases, the news sites of respected news organizations, printed books, or reference librarians.

Overall, the vast majority of these teachers say a top priority in today's classrooms should be teaching students how to "judge the quality of online information." As a result, a significant portion of the teachers surveyed here report spending class time discussing with students how search engines work, how to assess the reliability of the information they find online, and how to improve their search skills. They also spend time constructing assignments that point students toward the best online resources and encourage the use of sources other than search engines.

These are among the main findings of an online survey of a non-probability sample of 2,462 middle and high school teachers currently teaching in the U.S., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, conducted between March 7 and April 23, 2012. Some 1,750 of the teachers are drawn from a sample of advanced placement (AP) high school teachers, while the remaining 712 are from a sample of National Writing Project teachers. Survey findings are complemented by insights from a series of online and in-person focus groups with middle and high school teachers and students in grades 9-12, conducted between November, 2011 and February, 2012.

This particular sample is quite diverse geographically, by subject matter taught, and by school size and community characteristics. But it skews towards "cutting edge" educators who teach some of the most academically successful students in the country. Thus, the findings reported here reflect the realities of their special place in American education, and are not necessarily representative of all teachers in all schools. At the same time, these findings are especially powerful given that these teachers' observations and judgments emerge from some of the nation's most advanced classrooms.
The internet and digital technologies are significantly impacting how students conduct research: 77% of these teachers say the overall impact is "mostly positive," but they sound many cautionary notes
Asked to assess the overall impact of the internet and digital technologies on students' research habits, 77% of these teachers say it has been "mostly positive." Yet, when asked if they agree or disagree with specific assertions about how the internet is impacting students' research, their views are decidedly mixed.

On the more encouraging side, virtually all (99%) AP and NWP teachers in this study agree with the notion that the internet enables students to access a wider range of resources than would otherwise be available, and 65% also agree that the internet makes today's students more self-sufficient researchers.

At the same time, 76% of teachers surveyed " strongly agree" with the assertion that internet search engines have conditioned students to expect to be able to find information quickly and easily. Large majorities also agree with the assertion that the amount of information available online today is overwhelming to most students (83%) and that today's digital technologies discourage students from using a wide range of sources when conducting research (71%). Fewer teachers, but still a majority of this sample (60%), agree with the assertion that today's technologies make it harder for students to find credible sources of information.
The internet has changed the very meaning of "research"
Perhaps the greatest impact this group of teachers sees today's digital environment having on student research habits is the degree to which it has changed the very nature of "research" and what it means to "do research." Teachers and students alike report that for today's students, "research" means "Googling." As a result, some teachers report that for their students "doing research" has shifted from a relatively slow process of intellectual curiosity and discovery to a fast-paced, short-term exercise aimed at locating just enough information to complete an assignment.

These perceptions are evident in teachers' survey responses: 94% of the teachers surveyed say their students are "very likely " to use Google or other online search engines in a typical research assignment, placing it well ahead of all other sources that we asked about. Second and third on the list of frequently used sources are online encyclopedias such as Wikipedia, and social media sites such as YouTube. In descending order, the sources teachers in our survey say students are "very likely" to use in a typical research assignment:

Google or other online search engine (94%)

Wikipedia or other online encyclopedia (75%)

YouTube or other social media sites (52%)

Their peers (42%)

Spark Notes, Cliff Notes, or other study guides (41%)

News sites of major news organizations (25%)

Print or electronic textbooks (18%)

Online databases such as EBSCO, JSTOR, or Grolier (17%)

A research librarian at their school or public library (16%)

Printed books other than textbooks (12%)

Student-oriented search engines such as Sweet Search (10%)

In response to this trend, many teachers say they shape research assignments to address what they feel can be their students' overdependence on search engines and online encyclopedias. Nine in ten (90%) direct their students to specific online resources they feel are most appropriate for a particular assignment, and 83% develop research questions or assignments that require students to use a wider variety of sources, both online and offline.
Most teachers encourage online research, including the use of digital technologies such as cell phones to find information quickly, yet point to barriers in the school environment impeding quality online research
Asked which online activities they have students engage in, 95% of the teachers in this survey report having students "do research or search for information online," making it the most common online task. Conducting research online is followed by accessing or downloading assignments (79%) or submitting assignments (75%) via online platforms.

These teachers report using a wide variety of digital tools in their classrooms and assignments, well beyond the typical desktop and laptop computers. Specifically, majorities say they and/or their students use cell phones (72%), digital cameras (66%), and digital video recorders (55%) either in the classroom or to complete school assignments. Cell phones are becoming particularly popular learning tools, and are now as common to these teachers' classrooms as computer carts. According to respondents, the most popular school task students use cell phones for is "to look up information in class," cited by 42% of the teachers participating in the survey.

Yet, survey results also indicate teachers face a variety of challenges in incorporating digital tools into their classrooms, some of which, they suggest, may hinder how students are taught to conduct research online. Virtually all teachers surveyed work in a school that employs internet filters (97%), formal policies about cell phone use (97%) and acceptable use policies or AUPs (97%). The degree to which teachers feel these policies impact their teaching varies, with internet filters cited most often as having a "major impact" on survey participants' teaching (32%). One in five teachers (21%) say cell phone policies have a "major" impact on their teaching, and 16% say the same about their school's AUP. These impacts are felt most strongly among those teaching the lowest income students.
Teachers give students' research skills modest ratings
Despite viewing the overall impact of today's digital environment on students' research habits as "mostly positive," teachers rate the actual research skills of their students as "good" or "fair" in most cases. Very few teachers rate their students "excellent" on any of the research skills included in the survey. This is notable, given that the majority of the sample teaches Advanced Placement courses to the most academically advanced students.

Students receive the highest marks from these teachers for their ability to use appropriate and effective search queries and their understanding of how online search results are generated. Yet even for these skills, only about one-quarter of teachers surveyed here rate their students "excellent" or "very good." Indeed, in our focus groups, many teachers suggest that despite being raised in the "digital age," today's students are surprisingly lacking in their online search skills. Students receive the lowest marks for "patience and determination in looking for information that is hard to find," with 43% of teachers rating their students "poor" in this regard, and another 35% rating their students "fair."

Given these perceived deficits in key skills, it is not surprising that 80% of teachers surveyed say they spend class time discussing with students how to assess the reliability of online information, and 71% spend class time discussing how to conduct research online in general. Another 57% spend class time helping students improve their search skills and 35% devote class time to helping students understand how search engines work and how search results are generated. In addition, asked what curriculum changes might be necessary in middle and high schools today, 47% "strongly agree" and 44% "somewhat agree" that courses or content focusing on digital literacy must be incorporated into every school's curriculum.
A richer information environment, but at the price of distracted students?
Teachers are evenly divided on the question of whether today's students are fundamentally different from previous generations; 47% agree and 52% disagree with the statement that "today's students are really no different than previous generations, they just have different tools through which to express themselves." Responses to this item were consistent across the full sample of teachers regardless of the teachers' age or experience level, the subject or grade level taught, or the type of community in which they teach.

At the same time, asked whether they agree or disagree that "today's students have fundamentally different cognitive skills because of the digital technologies they have grown up with," 88% of the sample agree, including 40% who "strongly agree." Teachers of the lowest income students are the most likely to "strongly agree" with this statement (46%) but the differences across student socioeconomic status are slight, and there are no other notable differences across subgroups of teachers in the sample.

Overwhelming majorities of these teachers also agree with the assertions that "today's digital technologies are creating an easily distracted generation with short attention spans" (87%) and "today's students are too 'plugged in' and need more time away from their digital technologies" (86%). Two-thirds (64%) agree with the notion that "today's digital technologies do more to distract students than to help them academically." In focus groups, some teachers commented on the connection they see between students' "overexposure" to technology, and the resulting lack of focus and diminished ability to retain knowledge they see among some students. Time management is also becoming a serious issue among students, according to some teachers; in their experience, today's digital technologies not only encourage students to assume all tasks can be finished quickly and at the last minute, but students also use various digital tools at their disposal to "waste time" and procrastinate.

Thus, despite 77% of the survey respondents describing the overall impact of the internet and digital technologies on students' research habits as "mostly positive," the broad story is more complex. While majorities of teachers surveyed see the internet and other digital technologies encouraging broader and deeper learning by connecting students to more resources about topics that interest them, enabling them to access multimedia content, and broadening their worldviews, these teachers are at the same time concerned about digital distractions and students' abilities to focus on tasks and manage their time. While some frame these issues as stemming directly from digital technologies and the particular students they teach, others suggest the concerns actually reflect a slow response from parents and educators to shape their own expectations and students' learning environments in a way that better reflects the world today's students live in.
About the data collection
Data collection was conducted in two phases. In phase one, Pew Internet conductedtwo online and one in-person focus group with middle and high school teachers; focus group participants included Advanced Placement (AP) teachers, teachers who had participated in the National Writing Project's Summer Institute (NWP), as well as teachers at a College Board school in the Northeast U.S. Two in-person focus groups were also conducted with students in grades 9-12 from the same College Board school. The goal of these discussions was to hear teachers and students talk about, in their own words, the different ways they feel digital technologies such as the internet, search engines, social media, and cell phones are shaping students' research and writing habits and skills. Teachers were asked to speak in depth about teaching research and writing to middle and high school students today, the challenges they encounter, and how they incorporate digital technologies into their classrooms and assignments.

Focus group discussions were instrumental in developing a 30-minute online survey, which was administered in phase two of the research to a national sample of middle and high school teachers. The survey results reported here are based on a non-probability sample of 2,462 middle and high school teachers currently teaching in the U.S., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Of these 2,462 teachers, 2,067 completed the entire survey; all percentages reported are based on those answering each question. The sample is not a probability sample of all teachers because it was not practical to assemble a sampling frame of this population. Instead, two large lists of teachers were assembled: one included 42,879 AP teachers who had agreed to allow the College Board to contact them (about one-third of all AP teachers), while the other was a list of 5,869 teachers who participated in the National Writing Project's Summer Institute during 2007-2011 and who were not already part of the AP sample. A stratified random sample of 16,721 AP teachers was drawn from the AP teacher list, based on subject taught, state, and grade level, while all members of the NWP list were included in the final sample.

The online survey was conducted from March 7-April 23, 2012. More details on how the survey and focus groups were conducted are included in the Methodology section at the end of this report, along with focus group discussion guides and the survey instrument.
About the teachers who participated in the survey
There are several important ways the teachers who participated in the survey are unique, which should be considered when interpreting the results reported here. First, 95% of the teachers who participated in the survey teach in public schools, thus the findings reported here reflect that environment almost exclusively. In addition, almost one-third of the sample (NWP Summer Institute teachers) has received extensive training in how to effectively teach writing in today's digital environment. The National Writing Project's mission is to provide professional development, resources and support to teachers to improve the teaching of writing in today's schools. The NWP teachers included here are what the organization terms "teacher-consultants" who have attended the Summer Institute and provide local leadership to other teachers. Research has shown significant gains in the writing performance of students who are taught by these teachers.

Moreover, the majority of teachers participating in the survey (56%) currently teach AP, honors, and/or accelerated courses, thus the population of middle and high school students they work with skews heavily toward the highest achievers. These teachers and their students may have resources and support available to them-particularly in terms of specialized training and access to digital tools-that are not available in all educational settings. Thus, the population of teachers participating in this research might best be considered "leading edge teachers" who are actively involved with the College Board and/or the National Writing Project and are therefore beneficiaries of resources and training not common to all teachers. It is likely that teachers in this study are developing some of the more innovative pedagogical approaches to teaching research and writing in today's digital environment, and are incorporating classroom technology in ways that are not typical of the entire population of middle and high school teachers in the U.S. Survey findings represent the attitudes and behaviors of this particular group of teachers only, and are not representative of the entire population of U.S. middle and high school teachers.

Every effort was made to administer the survey to as broad a group of educators as possible from the sample files being used. As a group, the 2,462 teachers participating in the survey comprise a wide range of subject areas, experience levels, geographic regions, school type and socioeconomic level, and community type (detailed sample characteristics are available in the Methodology section of this report). The sample includes teachers from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. All teachers who participated in the survey teach in physical schools and classrooms, as opposed to teaching online or virtual courses.

English/language arts teachers make up a significant portion of the sample (36%), reflecting the intentional design of the study, but history, social science, math, science, foreign language, art, and music teachers are also represented. About one in ten teachers participating in the survey are middle school teachers, while 91% currently teach grades 9-12. There is wide distribution across school size and students' socioeconomic status, though half of the teachers participating in the survey report teaching in a small city or suburb. There is also a wide distribution in the age and experience levels of participating teachers. The survey sample is 71% female.
About the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project
The Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project is one of seven projects that make up the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The Project produces reports exploring the impact of the internet on families, communities, work and home, daily life, education, health care, and civic and political life. The Pew Internet Project takes no positions on policy issues related to the internet or other communications technologies. It does not endorse technologies, industry sectors, companies, nonprofit organizations, or individuals. While we thank our research partners for their helpful guidance, the Pew Internet Project had full control over the design, implementation, analysis and writing of this survey and report.
About the College Board
The College Board is a mission-driven not-for-profit organization that connects students to college success and opportunity. Founded in 1900, the College Board was created to expand access to higher education. Today, the membership association is made up of over 6,000 of the world's leading educational institutions and is dedicated to promoting excellence and equity in education. Each year, the College Board helps more than seven million students prepare for a successful transition to college through programs and services in college readiness and college success - including the SAT ® and the Advanced Placement Program ®. The organization also serves the education community through research and advocacy on behalf of students, educators and schools. For further information, visit www.collegeboard.org.

About the National Writing Project

The National Writing Project (NWP) is a nationwide network of educators working together to improve the teaching of writing in the nation's schools and in other settings. NWP provides high-quality professional development programs to teachers in a variety of disciplines and at all levels, from early childhood through university. Through its nearly 200 university-based sites serving all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, NWP develops the leadership, programs and research needed for teachers to help students become successful writers and learners. For more information, visit www.nwp.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Teens Do Research in the Digital World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three-quarters of AP and NWP teachers say that the internet and digital search tools have had a "mostly positive" impact on their students' research habits, but 87% say these technologies are creating an "easily distracted generation with short attention spans" and 64% say today's digital technologies "do more to distract students than to help them academically."

# data[].attributes.body
Students now have the ability to access information with the click of a mouse or touch by their finger. Students are not bound by hard copy information and are expected to leave grade school "real world ready" (Kilbane & Milman, 2014).

# data[].attributes.body
Students are being introduced to technology at a young age. In order to succeed in most jobs, students need to acquire technological skills throughout grade school to be fully prepared.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Can 21st Century Learners and Trends Transform Instruction?

# data[].attributes.subject
How Can 21st Century Learners and Trends Transform Instruction?

# data[].attributes.body
Kirkland Brown