How to Differentiate Without Splitting Students Up

Imagine you’re sitting in on a fourth-grade math class, witnessing a multiplication lesson. Instead of splitting the room between fast finishers and students who still need support, the teacher gives everyone the same task. It’s a Frayer Model, which is a structured graphic organizer that helps students build procedural, conceptual, and application-based skills. The results look different—arrays, repeated addition, shortcuts, real-world examples—but the structure is the same. One task. Many doors in. Every student engaged, every student successful.

Too often, differentiation gets confused with separation. Students are grouped by levels, and teachers rotate between them. But while teachers are with one group, the others wait without access to the experts in the room. Another approach starts with similarities, not differences. By designing learning routines that include everyone, teachers can differentiate in ways that keep the class together.

Consider another example, an 11th-grade history class. Students are analyzing the separation of powers in the Constitution. Traditionally, the teacher might assign different readings or create “leveled” groups. Instead, the teacher throws a transfer question to the entire class: “Where else do we see checks and balances in our lives?” One student describes the way referees, coaches, and players balance power in sports. Another talks about student government and how rules are passed. A third connects checks and balances to family dynamics at home. Students aren’t split apart; they’re pulled together by a question that is both rigorous and universally accessible.

Both of the above examples focus on uniting classrooms with shared strategies, structures, and thinking moves that allow every student to engage meaningfully. This is a more effective teaching method than splitting up students, which often sends unintended signals like “You belong in the advanced group,” “You need the remedial track,” and “You’re somewhere in the middle.” The result? Students internalize the labels, and teachers spend their most valuable resource—which is time—rotating between groups.

Here are three differentiation strategies that keep everyone working and learning in tandem.

Use Protocols that Differentiate Through Similarities

Strong protocols keep all students working within the same structure, avoiding isolation while allowing for individual variation. These protocols are scaffolds, as opposed to tracks.

Frayer Model: Perfect for vocabulary or conceptual understanding, this protocol asks every student to define, give examples and nonexamples, and create visuals. A fourth grader might define multiplication with arrays, while a ninth grader uses multiplication in algebraic proofs.

Same surface, different deep, problems: In math, students might see four-word problems that all look like division but tap into different underlying concepts. Students compare and discuss, realizing what’s similar and what’s unique.

Turn and talk with sentence stems: Give sentence starters at multiple levels: “Multiplication is…” for some students, and “Multiplication represents a shift in…” for other students. Every student participates in the same conversation, but with the level of scaffolding they need.

Play ‘Basketball’ with Questions

One of the simplest ways to keep all students engaged is to rethink questioning. Too often, educators toss a question to one student, get an answer, and move on. Instead, imagine questions as basketball passes around the room, where students add, refine, or extend an idea.

In practice, that means building from surface-level questions (the first pass, if you will) to deeper questions. Here are some examples:

• The surface-level question: “What is a ratio?” A student defines it.
• Then the deeper question: “How does a ratio differ from a fraction?” Another student adds their answer.
• Then the transfer question: “Where do we use ratios in real life?” A third student connects ratios to sports statistics.

Everyone in the class hears the full sequence. Everyone participates in the flow. Differentiation happens not by who gets the question, but by the range of questions that are asked.

In a history class, it’s the same setup:

• The surface-level question: “What does the executive branch do?”
• Then the deeper question: “How does that differ from Congress’s role?”
• Then the transfer question: “Where else do we see power distributed in this way?”

When questions move around the room, learning becomes a team sport, rather than a solo performance.

Leverage Universally Accessible Transfer Questions

Transfer questions are the great equalizer. They connect classroom content to broader contexts—places where all students have lived experience to draw from. These questions don’t water down rigor; they expand access.

• Math example: “Where might we see multiplication in nature?”
• English example: “How does figurative language show up in music that you listen to?”
• Science example: “If tectonic plates keep moving, what might Earth look like in a million years?”
• History example: “Where do we see checks and balances outside of government?”

Notice how each question builds outward from shared knowledge. Every student can contribute, and the conversation elevates naturally, because students bring diverse perspectives to the same anchor point.

Curveballs, High Performers, and Rare Exceptions

Teachers often ask what to do about whole class design when a few students are far ahead of others or when one group member ends up carrying the work. These are real challenges, but they don’t require abandoning whole class design. They require targeted, strategic differentiation, the kind that keeps everyone anchored in the same task, the same structures, and the same success criteria. For students who are performing at a high level, the goal should be adding curveballs that deepen their reasoning while keeping the core routine intact. Give the following suggestions a try.

Layer success criteria: Students first meet the closed criteria; those who do can choose an open extension to deepen or personalize the work. For example, after writing a clear conclusion, students choose an extension such as adding a counterargument or refining evidence.

Vary response complexity: Keep the task the same, but adjust the linguistic or cognitive lift. For instance, ask one student to respond using the word because, and another to respond using the word although. Or, ask students to utilize a compare/contrast connective.

Add a transfer twist: Ask students to apply the concept in a new situation or identify where it might fail. For example, after solving the problem, students answer another prompt: “Where else would this strategy work or fall apart?”

Give approximate feedback: Provide a cue without confirming correctness so that students must monitor and adjust their own thinking. For instance, place a dot next to a step and say, “Check this part,” without revealing whether it’s right or wrong.

Change a variable: Keep the task structure the same, but switch a key element (e.g., perspective, number, context, or constraint). For example, ask students to redo the same reasoning they just gave, but from a different character’s point of view.

In the rare cases when temporary separation is needed, the goal should always be to keep it brief and skill-specific, with a plan to bring students back into shared work. A few students may need a five-minute reteach on dividing fractions, or a small group might benefit from quick phonics reinforcement before rejoining the class routine. But differentiation done right doesn’t require tracks; it requires common tasks, common structures, and common questions. It sends a message that interdependency is a precondition of our learning together.