Tag Archives: streaming

DEEPENING UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENTIATION, Part 1

31.10.2025 Raimo J Leave a comment

Answering questions about a text is not a true CLT activity because the answers can be found in the text. Communivative use of language requires that the language is produced by the students themselves.

Still, ‘question – answer’ approach can be very useful. For some students it is as far as they can get – but I have witnessed a lot of miracles among students. They stop worrying about mistakes and throw in words and make a real effort to get their message through.

Let’s move on in our list of ‘Things to do in class’. I will first expand the ‘question-answer’ technique and show at the end of the article how to replace it, at least occasionally, with differentiation tasks.

The students have studied the chapter at home in advance
We have checked homework exercises
We have worked orally on the new words of the next chapter
We have listened to the chapter and checked understanding of the text
We have read the text or a part of it aloud
NOW we have to deepen our understanding of the text, and use differentiation
Doing oral activities, written exercises or underlining text in class

First of all, up to this point there have been many stages where the teacher has been the organizer and initiator of class activities. In my opinion this is the way it should be: time is saved, the students are active and the teacher is as much as possible in the role of a CLT teacher, an organizer and facilitator of learning
Linguists sometimes call this kind of text-based lesson ‘a closed system’ because the students are tied to the texts. However, in CLT activities we aim at using ‘an open system’ which ideally means that the students use language and ideas of their own.
In my logic this is the only way that makes sense because I do not want to throw my students into water until I know they can swim. In other words, the students must master the vocabulary, structures, phrases and some basic ideas about a new topic before they are able and can be allowed to talk freely.
One thing we teachers need to realize is that we do not make the questions about the text because we need information. No, since we already know the answers. This realization leads to the idea that we should use question – answer or any other approach as a way towards free talking. Asking questions from one student at a time does not make sense here. Everyone should be made talk and be active.
After reading the text aloud the students can be permitted to talk about the text freely. But can they all do it? The answer is NO, not all. So what are we teachers supposed to do? Use differentiation; i.e. every one of the students chooses one of the 3 tasks and works with others who took the same level task.
If you want to make the questions on the text yourself (since you have no time for differentiation) you can

A) usually we simply ask the questions and they are not visible, BUT now have the questions on the screen and read them from there (serving auditive and visual learners, developing reading and listening at the same time)
B) the funny option: ask all the students to answer the questions aloud at the same time (sounds crazy but 100 % activity level) You, poker-faced!
C) ask the students to work in pairs, (50 % of the class is active), the best option

Differentiation in ‘question-answer technique’

I assume just about all teachers use ‘question – answer technique’ but I hope not in the traditional manner. In Finland we used to have student streaming up to the mid 1980s, i.e. dividing the students into three proficiency levels with different goals. When the system was abolished, we only had mixed-ability classes and teachers were obliged to use differentiation in their lessons. Nevertheless, I kept the idea of three levels of streaming when I was trying to differentiate my teaching in class. But I let the students choose the level and change it as they pleased.

This is what I started to do in the mid-1980s at this stage of the lesson.

I gave three options to my students, they choose one task and find other who chose the same task and start working according to my instructions on the screen or in a handout.

They were completely free to choose A, B or C, even make a mixture of them if they wanted. They were only limited by time, 10 – 15 minutes.

Holiday resorts appeal to people everywhere, Shangri La close to Muscat, Oman.

For example, having dealt with the basics with a text (not here) the students would choose A, B or C. If you have a weak class, you may tell them to start with A and move to B and C if they have time.

A Look at the text about the summer holiday trip of the Hills, work in pairs and answer the questions orally taking turns.

When did the Hills start their holiday? (Lines 1 – 3) How did they get to Greece? (Lines 4 – 7) What kind of plans did they have for the holiday? (Lines 8 – 13) etc. Simple questions for beginners and weak students, answers can be found in the text, if encouraged the students can give answers in their own words. Why- and How do we know that -questions make the task a bit more demanding. Who, when, where, how, what … like, whose -questions are the easy ones since you can answer

B Look at the text about the summer holiday trip of the Hills, work in pairs and explain in your own words what happened in their holiday. You can make up things that are not mentioned in the text at all. Your story does not have to be true. Here are some key words: holiday, plan, London, train, flight, airport, hotel

C If you are not very interested in the Hill family’s holiday, explain about the best holiday trip your family has made. The foundation for the free talk is laid at the beginning of the lesson and the best students can easily do C.

The teacher remains in the background and does not interfere with the tasks unless the students ask him/her something. Neither do we correct any of the mistakes publicly even if we hear them. If we start doing that, the students become hesitant and finally stop talking in the fear of making a fool of themselves. The students do not make mistakes on purpose and besides, we can take notes on the mistakes and come back to them later on without pointing at any individuals.

You may think “Well, sounds reasonable enough but I do not have time to write the instructions.” But believe me, it only takes a few minutes and it is all worth the trouble when you see the smiles on the students faces. Besides, you can ask good students to take turns making up similar exercises for you. You will be surprised!

If you never or rarely get beyond the ‘traditional ‘questions – answers’ stage, you do not give your students a chance to speak freely, which is one of our final aims in CLT classes.

The next article deals with alternative ways of checking the level of understanding the text and how to turn the focus to talking in class.

Historical perspectives

DIFFERENTIATION

29.10.2025 Raimo J Leave a comment

Differentiation can be defined as all the measures that help individual students to work at the most suitable level at that point. I favour a system that I call ‘invisible optional differentiation’.

N.B. You will find many other examples on differentiation in my other articles all through these web pages. So here we are scratching the surface really.

This article will clarify the concept of ‘differentiation’, give an example of it and provide a historical perspective on it in Finland.

What do I mean by ‘invisible optional differentiation’?

invisible = an outsider who steps into the class does not immediately know who are weak or excellent students since everyone is working in a serious manner at their own pace. I seldom use the term ‘differentiation’ but simply make the students work in pairs or groups and let them choose the tasks.
optional = the students are not forced to do certain exercises but there is a choice, a number of options, so that the students can pick up the tasks they prefer, they can also mostly choose the ones they work with
differentiation = in mixed-ability classes very many activities in class are planned carefully in advance so that even the weakest students find tasks that suit their level and the best ones have tasks that are challenging enough

Let’s take an example: Checking the understanding of a chapter in a textbook. Usually the teachers ask questions and one student answers at a time. How can we make all students work hard at a level that suits them best? Topic of the chapter: ‘Travelling abroad’

If we differentiate and apply CLT principles, we give the students 3 options: A is mechanical (answers can be found in the text), B is semi-communicative since the answers/comments are at least partially based on the text, C is communicative since the ideas are based on the students’ experiences, not on the textbook.

A Work in pairs and answer the questions on the screen (or a handout) B Tell in your own words what the text is about (key words: platform …) C What do you think about travelling on the train compared with travelling by car or by plane?

Does this kind of differentiation cause us extra work as a teacher? Not really since we have always done A and B/C do not need any/much preparation.

Students are not labelled at any point according to their abilities.
Students are given options on what to do in some parts of the lesson and they can choose between tasks that vary in difficulty level.
Students can make progress at their own pace and they choose themselves which of the tasks given they will work on.
The teacher organizes the activities in class but does not tell the students which tasks they must do.
Differentiation can be used to help students in many ways.

– Differentiation using quantity: some students simply do much more exercises than the slow ones during the lesson.
– Differentiation using choice: Everybody is allowed to choose any tasks given which they want during the lesson.
– Differentiation based on learning styles or strategies or learner profile
– Differentiation based on proficiency level and flexible grouping: This is basically the same as streaming used to be: advanced students, average ones and slow learners in their own groups (temporary grouping)
– Differentiation guided by a special teacher having remedial teaching outside regular lessons

A historical view on differentiation in Finland

In the early 1980s when we first started to apply communicative language teaching, CLT, ideas we still had the streaming operating in Finnish language classes. Streaming meant dividing the students into three classes/levels according to their proficiency level and test results. We taught the groups in separate classrooms and even had special textbooks for them.

There is no denying that there was a lot of discussion about the abolition of the streaming system when we gradually introduced a completely new curriculum in the elementary and junior high schools in the 1980s. Teachers had little idea how one could possibly teach mixed-ability groups and it was feared that the level of learning would drop drastically.

Luckily the CLT ideas were the main things that were pushed ahead in our teachers’ in-service training days and we got a fresh start. We were also lucky since the Finnish publishers responded to the challenge by producing excellent and modern textbook materials full of CLT applications. In fact, the transition was rather smooth and it took only a few years and all of Finland was teaching mixed-ability classes with confidence.

As a result, no matter where you lived in Finland the students received the same kind of high quality language teaching. CLT and differentiation principles were a child of democracy entering schools more and more. One of the basic principles in our new curriculum was to try to make sure every single pupil and student had an opportunity to develop their skills in full. It practice it meant not only teaching English well but other skill areas too: social skills, manners and self-control, study skills and technical skills needed in working life.

One of the reasons Finland is so high in PISA results is that our weakest students are the best in the world. We do not give upon them and let them drop out.

We teachers started to take care of every individual and never gave up on them. Special teachers entered the schools to help the ones with serious learning difficulties such as dyslexia and ADHD. We realized that students learn differently, in their own style, and that we have to allow this happening in class too. We learnt to give positive, constructive feedback to enhance students’ self-confidence and motivation. And we learnt to evaluate the students not only on the basis of the course exams but took class participation and other factors into account.

When I graduated from senior high school in 1973 my final English examination was simple: translation from English into Finnish and from Finnish into English. Nothing else was tested. The evaluation was harsh: 2, 4, 6 and 9 point mistakes and some of my friends got minus 4, – 4?, as their grade out of 10 for the whole exam. How can someone’s knowledge of English be worth minus something? Luckily things have changed completely from those days.

Well now we English teachers are testing our students in reading, writing, listening, grammar, vocabulary and even speaking and differentiation is taken into acoount even in exams. What a dramatic change! I have described and discussed this change in the articles on the front page under heading ‘ The structure of an ideal text-based lesson’.

In my experience having three options in differentiation is quite sufficient in any skill area.

In the old streaming system we divided students into three proficiency levels and in CLT tasks dividing the tasks is most typically done in three categories too: mechanical, semi-communicative and communicative.

It is worth pointing out that differentiation can be efficiently done only in student-centered teaching, in classes where the teacher fascilitates and organizes the learning situations. All my articles on these web pages actually are part of this story even if there have been several massive changes in teaching since the late 1980s.

In my next articles I will clarify my principles and practical applications in differentiation and scaffolding, introduce four learner profiles and finally consider when differentiation is feasible and sensible in class and when it is not. These ideas have made me change many practices in my class.

Differentiation	Differentiation, how to apply the ideas
	Four types of learners, implications
	Differentiation in text-based lessons
	N.B. See also other articles