This document provides guidance for differentiating instruction through curriculum compacting by providing enrichment projects for students who have already mastered the content. It recommends designing enrichment projects based on student learner profiles and interests, addressing literacy and content standards. Projects should incorporate higher-order thinking skills based on Bloom's taxonomy and engage different learning styles like visual, auditory and kinesthetic. Teachers should define clear expectations, learning conditions, timelines and evaluation methods for differentiated enrichment projects. Research suggests this approach is more effective than traditional instruction for skills development, retention and student/teacher satisfaction.

1. A Pathway to Differentiation:
Sean M. Hildebrandt
Sean M. Hildebrandt
Secondary High Potential Specialist
Secondary High Potential Specialist
Email: shildebr@shakopee.k12.mn.us
Email: shildebr@shakopee.k12.mn.us
Phone: (952) 496 --5768
Phone: (952) 496 5768

2. Differentiation is a teacher’s
response to learner needs
shaped by mindset and
guided by general principles.
Teachers can differentiate
through content, process, or
product according to
students’ readiness, interest,
or learning profile.
- Carol Ann Tomlinson (1999)

3. Definition: a differentiation
strategy used with students
who have already mastered
the skills or content to be
taught
Two avenues can be taken to
compact curriculum:
•Acceleration
•Enrichment

4. An valid pre-assessment
has been designed and
administered to class
Students have mastered 80%
of the content before the
unit has even begun!
Student and parents
and/or guardian agree

5. Research suggests that project based
learning is more effective than
traditional instruction:
be more effective than traditional instruction
for preparing students to integrate and explain
concepts. (Capon & Kuhn, 2004)
in increasing academic achievement on annual
state-administered assessment tests (Geier et.
al., 2008)
long-term retention, skill development and
satisfaction of students and teachers (Strobel &
van Barneveld, 2008)

6. Revisit Student Learner
Profiles. They can help you
build appropriate and
engaging enrichment projects.
Each individual has a unique
Learner Profile consisting of:
 Personal Interests
 Individual Aptitudes
 Multiple Intelligences
 Learning Styles

7. Select one or two literacy
and content standards
to address
Consider whether this
project will serve as the
summative assessment or
prepare student for the
summative assessment.

8. Bloom’s Hierarch were
updated in the mid 90’s to
better incorporate 21st
Century thinking skills:
Projects can be
designed to intentionally
address specific levels of
thinking.

9. Visual (29%): embrace
pictures, videos, graphics,
diagrams, charts, models
Auditory (34%) embrace
lectures, recordings, storytelling,
music, verbalization, questioning
Kinesthetic (37%) embrace
acting, role-play, clay modeling

11. Run Bloom’s Levels across the top and Learning styles down.

12. Define Expectations
Learning Conditions
Working Conditions
Evaluation Methods
Timeline

14. Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay-
Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based
science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
45(8), 922-939
Strobel, J. & van Barneveld, A. (2008) "When is PBL More Effective? A Meta-synthesis of
Meta-analyses Comparing PBL to Conventional Classrooms," Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 44-58. Retrieved from
http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/vol3/iss1/4.
Capon, N, & Kuhn, D. (2004). What’s so good about problem-based learning? Cognition and
Instruction, 22, 61-79.
Miller, P. (2001). Learning styles: The multimedia of the mind. ED 451340.