When a student already understands something, do we go deeper? Or do we just move them along faster? When do we create an advanced version of a task? When can we just go on to the next thing?
First, let’s think outside of school.
We Don’t Need The Tee Anymore
Imagine a young athlete. She’s six. She’s playing tee-ball. The coach notices that she can consistently hit a gentle, underhand pitch. That tee is a scaffold. And this athlete does not need that particular scaffold. Do we make the coach to develop Advanced Tee-Ball? No! That seems silly. We just remove the darn tee!
Likewise:
- My son was frustrated with Duplo at age 3. We moved him on to Lego! We didn’t try to create Advanced Duplo.
- If you’re bowling with someone who doesn’t need bumpers, you just remove the bumpers. Let them move towards real bowling. We’re not creating High-Ability Bumper Bowling!
- When my kid could handle a bike with training wheels, we didn’t differentiate the training wheels. We took them away so he could ride the bike for real.
So, here’s a guideline. Don’t try to differentiate a scaffold. If there’s a scaffold, just remove it. Move the child along naturally. Keeping a scaffold around will hold students back.
My kid would never learn to ride the bike as long as the training wheels were there!
When Do We Go Deeper?
Eventually, there’s a point where the scaffolds are mostly gone. Students are approaching the real version of a task. This is when there is room to naturally go deeper.
By my 5th year of Little League, our games were relatively close to real baseball. Sure, the field was smaller and the game was shorter. But, we could learn real baseball strategy – not just basic rules. At this level, it’s easy to go deeper into baseball. We learned to read the coach’s secret hand signals, we learned when to steal second, we learned to fake a bunt and then swing away. And the more advanced players moved much faster through these stages.
Once you’re playing with Lego, it’s obvious what to do with more advanced builders. You buy more complex sets. You start incorporating those fancy Technic pieces. You buy the robotics set. Lego scales up naturally. A 7-year-old can play with Lego. A 97-year-old retired NASA engineer can play with Lego.
Once the training wheels are gone, and the kid can ride their bike without falling, they will naturally move towards more advanced bike riding. They’ll go faster and longer. They’ll set up a ramp, try mountain biking, or go off curbs.
When we stop over-scaffolding, the path forward becomes simple and clear. And students will naturally move towards an appropriate level of complexity!
Take it to School
So, imagine a young child who has memorized their ABCs. Do we hold them back and force the teacher to develop an Advanced Alphabet Project? No! Just move the child along to the obvious next thing. Maybe it’s the next unit. Or maybe they’re ready for 1st grade reading material. Maybe they need 2nd or 3rd grade material! (I did!) Remember, you’ve got students who are ready for work that’s several grades beyond their age.
If a first grader can add single digit numbers, you don’t need to develop a differentiated project for adding single-digit numbers! There is no such thing as advanced single-digit addition! Single-digit addition is a scaffold. Remove it and move on to two-digit and then three-digit addition.
I consider myself so lucky to have been in a 1st/2nd/3rd combo class as 1st grader. Mrs. Phillips didn’t waste her time (or mine) developing “Advanced First Grade” projects for us. We 1st graders just sat with the 2nd or 3rd graders when we were ready. My teacher moved us along naturally!
Is one-step algebra so simple that a student can do it in their head? One-step algebra is a scaffold! Don’t differentiate a scaffold. Just move on to two-step algebra.
Teachers do not have time to create more material if they can just grab the next thing.
Now, if my students are learning about the American Revolution, this is a topic that I can push deeper. I can bring in more advanced resources for my advanced students. I can embed multiple perspectives. I can integrate universal themes and ask synthesize-level questions. But, in a way, I’m just moving my advanced 5th graders towards the thinking that their 8th-grade teacher will expect.
Standards Are A Minimum
And that last bit is key. If I’m teaching US History in 5th grade, I should know what the 8th grade teacher will be doing with this same content. An easy way to spot scaffolds is to know what content looks like several grades up.
For too long, I approached my standards as the maximum; a goal I hoped students could maybe reach. A mentor corrected me. “Standards are a minimum, not a maximum,” they said. And a bunch of your students already exceed them on day one!
Can you imagine being a Tee Ball coach but not knowing the rules of real baseball? But that’s what I was like as a teacher! I should have known what the natural next steps were.
As a 4th-grade teacher, I should know what 5th and 6th grade teachers teach. Often it’s just a less scaffolded version of what is expected in 4th grade. As I remove scaffolds, my students are moving towards 6th, 9th, and 12th grade versions of 4th grade content. 4th grade is on a continuum, not an isolated island.
My 3rd-grade math standards might say: “Students will multiply and divide within 100.” When Jimmy can do that, I don’t need to spin my wheels creating an Advanced Multiplication Within 100 project. I can ask my 4th or 5th grade colleague, “What should Jimmy naturally move towards next?”
This is so much more respectful of the student’s time. And it will save YOU so much time as a teacher.