• posing provocative questions that lead the student toward a deeper analysis: Thinking Skills – 5 whys
• asking the student to find a connection between usually unrelated ideas: Affinity diagram, Simple graphic organisers (Venn diagrams), Hexagonal thinking
• comparing different concepts which may span different disciplines: Simple graphic organisers (Venn diagrams; Keynote – Compare and contrast)
• using the ‘what if…?’ question to stimulate thinking: Mentimeter
• finding problems to solve by sequencing a series of student developed inquiry-based questions: Question formulation technique, branching scenarios, Think-Pair-Share
• making generalisations or identifying ethical dilemmas or controversial issues: Concept map, Branching scenarios
• examining factors that influence or determine trends: Using keywords, Plus, Minus, Interesting (PMI)
• using philosophical inquiry and questioning to find patterns: Question formulation technique, Affinity diagram
• creating verbal or visual analogies to explain understanding: Padlet, Six Thinking Hats
• differentiating outcomes using higher order skills such as analysis, synthesis or creation: Activitiy grids, Jigsaw

• pre-testing prior knowledge and using this to inform teaching and learning: Kahoot, Quiz programs, KWLH chart, Exit tickets
• creating opportunity for negotiated independent projects following pre-test analysis: KWLH, Learning portfolios, Learning logs
• co-developing and co-designing cross-disciplinary projects: Google Docs, Hexagonal thinking, Polya questioning
• justifying thinking when given a provocative question and communicating it in a variety of ways for different audiences: Audacity podcast, Hot seat. Gallery walk
• including students in debate and/or robust discussion viewed from diverse perspectives: Affinity diagram (Keynote – For and against), Simple graphic organisers (Keynote – For and against)
• using real world problems from the local community to create a problem-based learning project: Design thinking
• providing opportunities for students to learn advanced level content through engagement with a mentor or enrichment provision: Activities grid
• examining ambiguities or inconsistencies and explaining how these might influence common understanding: Six thinking hats
• finding and explaining shifts in thinking from the beginning of the learning: Graphic organisers (Keynote – Cause and effect)

• giving choice to demonstrate evidence of learning: Learning portfolio, Branching scenario
• providing choice from a given list of alternatives: Activity grids
• giving students the opportunity to create their own alternatives of how they will learn: Parking lot, Polya questioning, Concepts maps
• accessing a range of questions to stimulate thinking and discussion: Peer discussion and conferencing, Branching scenario
• open-ended questioning which more appropriately aligns with different interest areas: Nearpod, Google Classroom (question)
• encouraging free thinking, brainstorming and planning of the focus for learning: Brainstorming, Affinity diagrams, Thinking skills, Quick response
• making modifications so there is access through different interests or passions: Activity grids, Study Apple Books
• giving options to choose perplexing ideas for further exploration: Nearpod, Parking lot, Six Thinking Hats

• seeking understanding of complex symbols or systems: Code.org Studio, Grok Academy
• unpacking thinking at a deeper level, demanding justification of reason and thought: Six thinking hats, Question quadrant
• seeking justification of thinking and reasoning through different means: Six thinking hats, Nearpod, Question Formulation Technique (QFT), Question quadrant
• asking ‘what makes you say that?’: Concept maps (Multiple intelligence perspectives), Parking lot
• embedding concepts into the learning, rather than just topics: Concept maps
• using advanced level content that goes beyond what is usually expected
• building examination and inquiry into learning design: Design thinking, Nearpod, Question quadrant, Parking lot
• using philosophical inquiry to examine ideas at a more abstract level: Six thinking hats, Question quadrant
• synthesising information from a complex to simple level using creative systems of classification: Frayer diagram, Semantic gradient
• creating symbols to represent a sequence of ideas or procedure
• creating simplified systems to unpack complexity Clines and continuums

• creating unique products made from adapting others’ ideas: Keynote
• using scenario-based/simulation learning: Gallery walks, Design thinking
• comparing and evaluating mind mapping tools and their effectiveness in conveying the most appropriate message: Simple graphic organisers (Keynote – Compare and contrast)
• making changes from ‘whole to part’, or 'part to whole’: Concept maps
• clarifying the causes and effects of different events, ideas or processes: Concept maps (Cause and effect)
• organising different ideas into unique categories or systems: Affinity diagram
• challenging the reliability of a claim or existing notion: Affinity diagram (For and against)
• devising questions, adapting and posing these to different stakeholders to elicit responses from a variety of perspectives: Affinity diagram (For and against)
• creating a variety of different consequences using ‘if…: then…’ Branching scenarios
• applying ‘reverse thinking’ to dismantle the usual logical direction of an understanding: Polya questioning

• creating or co-creating new or unique products or responses: Minecraft
• using Blooms taxonomy question stems to lead discussion or to frame assessment tasks: Activities grid, Nearpod
• asking for a deeper analysis and justification of students’ responses: PMI, Six thinking hats
• developing ‘what if ...’ scenarios to provoke thinking: Branching scenarios
• using concept maps to visualise and explain thought processes or research: Concept maps
• synthesising information and evaluating the most relevant ideas when solution-finding: Design thinking
• making evaluative judgement about ideas using thinking strategies: PMI (plus, minus, interesting), Six thinking hats
• using visual representations to summarise information and explain complex relationships: Frayer diagram, Concept mapping
• exploring personal thinking and reflecting on the reasons behind these thoughts in comparison to others: Peer discussion and conferencing
• speculating on probable future applications or possibilities: Six thinking hats, Question formulation technique

• using pre and post testing, and formative assessment, to inform the direction of the next teaching and learning phase: Quiz programs, Parking lot, Exit tickets, Kahoot!
• posing questions before teaching new material or skills to determine the speed of learning: Nearpod, Google forms, Question formulation technique
• compacting the curriculum in response to an analysis of pre-testing results
• spending less time on learning new material or skills compared to age peers
• delivering specific lesson content at a faster pace where pre-test results indicate a need
• negotiating a variety of completion dates to better organise learning: Google Classroom (assignments), Peer discussion and conferencing
• providing scaffolds and explicitly modelling these to students: Writing scaffolds, Branching scenarios
• facilitating time schedules and enabling goal setting: Google Classroom (assignments)
• using individualised ‘what I know - want to know - how to learn - what I learned’ (KWHL) charts before, during and after the learning process: KWLH

• scrutinising contemporary media issues and using these to debate ideas: Six thinking hats
• inviting an expert audience to showcase proof of learning: Design thinking
• addressing current events and ideas to analyse complex concepts: Design thinking
• using autobiographical study to analyse the content, the journey taken, thought processes and philosophy
• unpacking exemplars to model and guide high expectations: Learning intentions and success criteria (LISC with WAGOLL)
• evaluating learning and progress by experts in the field: Design thinking
• including an independent study of a famous person: Using keywords, Question formulation technique
• exploring the methods of inquiry that experts in various domains use to seek their information

• giving opportunity to showcase strengths in a variety of applications and to a diverse audience base: Minecraft, Gallery walks, Video performances
• providing variable means of communicating and acknowledging peers: Backchannel discussion, Daily check-in, Hexagonal thinking
• co-designing negotiated personalised learning profiles: Learning portfolio
• providing differentiated product options for assessments: Padlet, Minecraft Hot seat, Storyboarding, Design thinking
• using humour in the classroom to develop rapport and a positive learning climate
• using think-pair-share routines to encourage collaboration, active reasoning and communication: Question formulation technique (think-pair share)
• building student voice opportunities into daily instruction: Asynchronous discussion, Backchannel discussion, Google Classroom (Stream), Daily check-in
• creating an environment that encourages experimentation and risk-taking: Design thinking, Minecraft, Branching scenarios
• clearly communicating explicit criteria for success: Learning intentions and success criteria, Google Classroom (Rubrics)
• providing explicit language to use when reflecting, such as ‘what can I do better next time and how will I achieve this?’: Peer feedback
• providing wait time to give opportunity for reflection: Peer discussion and conferencing , Learning portfolios
• emphasising personal best, value of effort, growth and positive attitudes towards learning

Purpose of resource

This resource is designed to support teachers to embed effective differentiation in planning, teaching and assessment cycles for high potential and gifted students. It can be used as a stand-alone resource and is also embedded into professional learning and resources.

Target audience

The primary audience for this resource is teachers and middle leadership tasked with embedding differentiation into the planning, teaching and learning and assessment cycle as part of mandatory implementation of the High Potential and Gifted Education policy.

When and how to use

This resource can be used by schools to embed differentiation for high potential and gifted students into current programs, practices and procedures. It can be used in planning, teaching, assessment, establishing classroom environment and reflection processes.

Research base

This resource was developed in consultation with teachers, school leaders and education support teams. The research base used was What works best in practice, Revisiting Gifted Education, Gross (2013), Munro (2012), Tomlinson (2005), Van Tassel-Baska (1986) and Vialle and Rogers (2009). The resource also draws on a range of aligned departmental resources.

System alignment

This resource aligns with the following system frameworks and strategies:

Australian Professional Standards for Teachers: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.1, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, 4.2, 5.2

Contact

For more information, contact: hpge@det.nsw.edu.au