Jana Kratochvílová, Jiří Havel,
Department of Primary Education
Faculty of Education, Masaryk University




}Key issues:
}
}How do teachers evaluate the level of individualization and differentiation? (Quantitative
approach)
}What arguments do teachers choose for advocacy of their evaluation? (Qualitative approach).
}What arguments do teachers use for improving the situation? (Qualitative approach)
}How, individualization and differentiation is seen in the school in fact?
}

}Eight schools (60 teachers)
}Equitable representation of rural and urban schools
}
}
}
The urban schools
The rural schools:
mostly fully organized
1 fully organized,
3 small schools
217 - 649 students
45 -165 students
16 - 41 teachers
3 – 13 teachers
wide range of social and cultural background
cultural background much more homogenous

}The Czech version of the questioner Framework for self-evaluation of conditions of education 2007
modified from  the British original Index for inclusion (Booth, T. & Ainscow, M. 2002).
}
}Czech version 2002 included 42 criteria and the guidance questions were greatly reduced in the
number 195.
}
}
}

}Qualitative and quantitative analysis of data obtained seven selected indicators.
}Quantitative data - the seven-point scale (1 - not at all, 7 - completely).
}Qualitative data (content analysis of arguments for sub-criteria) which are very important for
evaluation the objectivity of the chosen degree.

}
}Respect
}Communication
}Cooperation
}Maximum expectation
}Individualization and Differentiation

Criterion
Average 2009
Average 2011
Employees of school create optimal conditions for education of each pupil
6,0
6,1
Education respects the diversity of pupils
6,0
6,3
Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to the elimination of barriers to learning and
active participation of all pupils
5,7
5,8
Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance of each pupil
5,4
5,9
The access to homework contributes to learning of all pupils
5,3
5,0

}Arguments
}Observation
}Diagnostic activities of teachers (SEN)
}Close cooperation with experts (particularly in developing IP)
}
}No argument to the indicator: Teachers included in the reflection of the lesson pupils too.
}
}Continuous diagnostic activities: Was there a word, which didn´t you understand? What was for you
easy, difficult?
}
}Content differentiation in reading, respect for the individual pace of writing, the choice of a
suitable size, writing instrument
}The using of specific equipment
}
}Completely missing work with the goals – objectives of teaching and assessment
}

}Arguments
}Observation
}For this item is characterized a really high dispersion of value between schools:
}
}Pupils regularly evaluate not only the results of their activities, but also the learning process
and the causes of success or failure.
}Regularly used self-evaluation of pupils allows them to reflect their knowledge, skills, level of
key competencies.
}At the end of group work we perform evaluations (writing - a questionnaire, or oral).
}Information books are based on weekly and monthly self-evaluation.
}
}
}Frequent immediate feedback - motivating, but usually not specific enough: great
}Teachers  judge  knowledge mainly, rarely competencies or process
}The corrective function of evaluation is missing
}Self-assessment is implemented more as summative
}Working with the evaluation criteria is exceptional
}Prevails the summative assessment

}Arguments
}Observation
}Generally teachers don`t make differentiation and individualization of homeworks. An example of a
good argument is:
}
}We differentiate homework, enter optional tasks, use the class library, internet classroom.
}Some tasks are awarded on a voluntary basis; sometimes pupils have the opportunity of their choice
}
}
}Mostly prevail collective tasks in which students didn´t have the choice of task or cooperation
}Typically it was a task specified from a textbook or workbook
}Homework with aim to practice curriculum
}Rarely acquire new information
}

}Arguments
}Observation
}Despite the high average 6, it is clear that the arguments on this item was often general or did
not apply to a given indicator.
}More specific statements
}Lessons include activities that can be done individually, in pairs, groups and with the whole
class
}There are various activities including discussion, interpretation, writing, drawing, problem
solving, using of library, audio-visual technology, practical activities and information technology
}An important attribute is the choice (order of tasks, individually, in groups, use of tools and
techniques), consideration of the individual pace of students
}Teachers often transfer knowledge
}They frequently connect the school with life (theory – practice)
}Respecting of individual pace
}Various activities: writing, reading, drawing, problem solving, use of libraries, computers,
practical activities
}Less experiments, but more mutual peer learning
}Unique leadership on the various records of work, oftenly worksheets
}

}
}Teams of teachers for their argumentation often used the irrelevant answers that were too wide,
general and unspecified or did not respond to the question and to the results of observation.
}
}One school was significantly different by its specific and factual argumentation. This school also
excelled in the content analysis of the school curriculum.
}
}Most schools are on the way to individualization and differentiation.
}
}
}

}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}Thank you for your attention!
}
}
}
}Brussels, WCLTA
}22.–25. 10. 2012
}
MCj02304020000[1]