238 November 2012 teaching children mathematics | Vol. 19, No. 4 www.nctm.

org
Using
Math
Stations
D
ifferentiation is one way to make the success of all students in
mathematics a reality. Professional development, conversations
with colleagues, and questions from administrators leave no
doubt about the importance of the concept of differentiation.
Equity in education is of increasing concern as teachers encounter more and
more diversity in inclusive classroom environments:
All students, regardless of their personal characteristics, backgrounds,
or physical challenges, must have opportunities to studyand support
to learnmathematics. Equity does not mean that every student should
receive identical instruction; instead, it demands that reasonable and
appropriate accommodations be made as needed to promote access and
attainment for all students. (NCTM 2000, p. 12)
for Commonsense
Inclusiveness
To meet diverse student needs,
use an approach that is situated in
understanding fractions.
By Janet B. Andreasen and Jessi ca H. Hunt
S
H
O
C
K
/
V
E
E
R
Copyright 2012 The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc. www.nctm.org. All rights reserved.
This material may not be copied or distributed electronically or in any other format without written permission from NCTM.
240 November 2012 teaching children mathematics | Vol. 19, No. 4 www.nctm.org
With the diversity of student populations
rising with respect to disability status, language
needs, ethnicities, and learning styles, educa-
tors are increasingly challenged to deliver qual-
ity mathematics instruction that all students
benet from every day. At the same time, Prin-
ciples and Standards for School Mathematics
(NCTM 2000) and the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics (CCSSI 2010) stress
a shift in instruction from practicing procedures
and memorizing denitions toward instruction
that emphasizes mathematical practices and
conceptual understanding. As such, mathemat-
ics teachers are expected to possess not only the
necessary knowledge and training to facilitate
the learning of mathematical content but also
the pedagogical skills to support the learning
needs of all children.
How, then, do mathematics educators
develop meaningful mathematical tasks for
instruction and practice that address students
diverse academic needs and ensure that all stu-
dents have the opportunity for success in learn-
ing and understanding mathematics? Although
most teachers are familiar with the concept of
accommodating for varying student needs, the
realities of providing such accommodations
present unique challenges to educators with
respect to time, resources, and knowledge of
what to offer to which students and to what
degree. Many teachers continue to wonder how
to make differentiation work in everyday class-
room instruction, practice, and assessment. One
approach that allows educators to deliver differ-
entiated practice and assessment opportunities
to effectively reach all students in the classroom
environment is the use of math stations.
This article offers a commonsense example
of how to use math stations to differentiate
practice as well as assessment opportunities for
a model lesson plan involving the comparison
of fractions. First we dene differentiation as it
relates to practice and assessment in mathemat-
ics classrooms and highlight specic character-
istics and types of differentiation. Next we look
at an Illuminations lesson (http://illuminations
.nctm.org) and demonstrate how to build on
an existing quality mathematics lesson by
using math stations for differentiated practice
and assessment opportunities. We offer nal
thoughts and suggestions as a catalyst to further
assist educators in implementing differentiation
in their mathematics lessons.
Dening differentiation in
practice and assessment
Differentiation is a process through which
teachers enhance learning by matching student
characteristics to practice and assessment. Dif-
ferentiation allows all students to access the
same classroom curriculum by providing entry
points, learning tasks, and outcomes that are
tailored to students needs (Hall, Strangman,
and Meyer 2003, paragraph 4). It is not a new
concept. Indeed, forms of differentiation have
occurred in many classrooms with the use of
varying teaching strategies, teaching to student
interests, allowing for student choice in assess-
ment or practice activities, or by varying tools
and instructional methods. Although differenti-
ating mathematics practice and assessment can
seem complex, it generally takes one of three
forms: (1) process differentiation, (2) content
differentiation, or (3) product differentiation.
Process differentiation
Sometimes it becomes necessary for teachers
to supply more than one form of practice or
assessment of mathematical concepts because
students current understanding of the concept
or concurrent factorsfor example, limited
English prociency, varying learning styles, or
Math stations can be
an effective solution
to the challenge of
accommodating
the wide-ranging
instructional needs
of a diverse student
population.
M
O
N
K
E
Y

B
U
S
I
N
E
S
S

I
M
A
G
E
S
/
V
E
E
R
www.nctm.org Vol. 19, No. 4 | UFBDIJOHDIJMESFONBUIFNBUJDTtNovember 2012 241
disability statusmay affect learning. Teachers
who provide more than one way for students to
make sense of the mathematics they are work-
ing with during practice, instruction, or assess-
ment are employing process differentiation. For
instance, consider a situation where students
are practicing addition of fractions. Teachers
who use process differentiation might furnish
a learning center where several students prac-
tice using concrete representations of situated
fraction problems. A second group of students
might use a computer program in small groups
to model adding fractions. Perhaps a third group
uses online websites or blog quests to extend
knowledge or to enhance the relevance of the
learning situation. Process differentiation allows
all students to apply and practice their develop-
ing knowledge of fraction addition in a manner
that caters to their specic instructional needs.
Content differentiation
At other times, a teacher nds differentiating
the content itself necessary as students learn
mathematical concepts. Content differentiation
involves offering more than one way for stu-
dents to make sense of the mathematics content
being presented during practice or assessment.
Content differentiation does not mean that an
educator takes a mathematical concept and
reduces its complexity or rigor. Instead, the
goal is always mastery of the content. In other
words, how a student approaches the content
changes, not what content they are approaching.
Consider a group of students learning frac-
tion equivalence (see fig. 1). A teacher may
have originally introduced fraction equivalency
through part-to-whole situations using parti-
tioned circles, bars, or sets of objects. However,
some students cannot make sense of equiva-
lency through pictorial part-to-whole situations
(Mazzocco and Devlin 2008). Therefore, teach-
ers may nd it necessary to use alternate frac-
tion interpretations to teach fraction concepts
and equivalence, such as quotients or ratio-like
situations. Providing multiple interpretations of
the mathematics content being learned not only
gives access to understanding and prociency to
students who typically struggle with mathemat-
ics but also gives a deeper and more complete
understanding of equivalency concepts to the
entire class. All the students are mastering the
content of equivalency of fractions; however,
they are approaching and explaining equiva-
lency using different models.
Product differentiation
Too often, teachers expect to measure the end
result, or product, of learning in the form of
written tests or other traditional methods. Prod-
uct differentiation can offer learners alterna-
tives for demonstrating what they know during
instruction, practice, or assessment. Not every
student will have the same strategies or abili-
ties to show what they understand. Traditional
means of showing knowledge could inhibit stu-
dents whose learning style does not align with
written assessments. If assessments are geared
completely toward a form of learning that not
all students possess as a strength, some stu-
dents will be less able to demonstrate what they
understand about the mathematics, or the how
of learning. This does not necessarily mean that
these students have not mastered the content;
instead, they may be unable to express their
understanding of the content using the assess-
ment provided. For instance, if a teacher would
like to ascertain what students know about
comparing and ordering fractions, he or she
may require students to show their knowledge
through mannerisms that the Common Core
State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) doc-
ument advocates. For example, students could
F
I
G
U
R
E

1
Multiple interpretations of math content give
struggling students access to understanding and
prociency while allowing the entire class to come
to a deeper, more complete understanding.
Fraction
equivalence
Learn through part
to whole
Learn through ratios
Learn through measure Learn through
quotient/sharing
242 November 2012 teaching children mathematics | Vol. 19, No. 4 www.nctm.org
show how to compare two fractions with dif-
ferent numerators and different denominators
by creating common denominators or numera-
tors or by comparing to a benchmark fraction,
such as 1/2, through modeling, explanation,
and justication (CCSSI 2010). Thus, the notion
of alternate representations is incorporated
into the NCTM Process Standards, particularly
Representation and Communication, and the
Mathematical Practices of CCSSM, particularly
modeling with mathematics, using appropriate
tools strategically, and constructing viable argu-
ments. Teachers who use product differentiation
not only provide access for all students to dem-
onstrate understanding of mathematics but also
provide instruction and assessments that link
to NCTM Standards, as well as to CCSSM, for
teaching fractions.
Differentiation and instruction
Many aspects of differentiation are rooted in
good mathematical teaching practices. Examin-
ing the NCTM Process Standards and the CCSS
Mathematical Practices, we note that good
mathematics instruction already differentiates
process, content, and product. This is the core of
standards-based instruction and how students
obtain essential understanding of mathemat-
ics. The use of math stations illustrated here
supplies a commonsense method for making
this differentiation explicit in practice and
assessment.
Math stations for practice and
assessment
To illustrate how differentiation can be used to
offer practice and assessment in mathemat-
ics lessons that are rich in content, depth, and
sense making, consider the elementary school
lesson plan Fun with Fractions, currently
displayed on NCTMs Illuminations website
(http://illuminations.nctm.org/LessonDetail
.aspx?ID=L541). The lesson involves using the
length model to teach comparison of frac-
tions. As previously stated, the Common Core
State Standards for Mathematics document
advises that students know how to compare
two fractions with different numerators and
different denominators by creating common
denominators or numerators or by comparing
to a benchmark fraction (CCSSI 2010). Math
stations are one form of differentiation set up
as multiple locations, or stations, within the
same classroom. Students use math stations to
work on different activities relating to the same
concept at the same time, with differentiation
between stations focusing on content, process,
or product differentiation. Generally, four math
stations can be used to differentiate practice or
assessment (see g. 2):
1. The Teachers station is for students who
need additional help or enrichment on
a topic. The teacher delivers this type of
practice to small groups. It varies on the
basis of the concepts and students needs
and is more individualized than practice at
other stations.
Reteaching at a teacher station
To differentiate content for reteaching fraction comparison in an alternate
way, this teacher examined the student questions from the original lesson:
1. What patterns do you notice when you compare fractions?
2. When you order the fraction strips from largest to smallest, what do
you notice about the relationship between the size of the fraction and
the denominator?
3. Do you think this relationship always holds true?
4. Does a similar relationship hold true for fractions where the denomina-
tor is some constant number?
Set up as multiple locations within the same
classroom, math stations are one form of
differentiation where the class simultaneously
works on different activities relating to the
same concept. F
I
G
U
R
E

2
Adapted from Tomlinson 1999
Math Station: General Setup Idea
Essential question/indicator
information
Proof place
Practice plaza The shop
Teachers station
www.nctm.org Vol. 19, No. 4 | UFBDIJOHDIJMESFONBUIFNBUJDTtNovember 2012 243
2. The Shop station is geared toward
completion of unit projects, error analysis,
and written analysis of ctitious work.
3. The Practice plaza station serves as a
multiple practice opportunity for students
needing repeated exposure to a concept,
whether this is differentiated content with
a new representation or a differentiated
process with a new tool using an already-
addressed representation.
4. The Proof place station involves students
in using tools and models to solve, explain,
and justify a presented mathematical
situation.
A teacher could choose to use two, three, or
all four stations simultaneously to differenti-
ate content, process, and/or product in the
mathematics classroom. Suppose Mr. Harris, a
third-grade teacher, wishes to design differen-
tiated practice and assessment opportunities
to accompany the Fun with Fractions lesson
plan. To do so, he would employ four main steps
involved in planning math stations:
1. Consider the content to be taught and
where students understanding currently
stands.
2. Decide the types of differentiation needed.
3. Use indicator information to assign student
groups.
4. Design the practice or assessment tasks.
Lets begin by examining the content and cur-
rent student understanding for this lesson.
The content and
current student understanding
Learning objectives for this component of the
Fun with Fractions lesson include the following:
s Demonstrate understanding that a fraction
can be represented as part of a linear region.
s Describe part of a linear region using
fractions.
s Compare fractions to determine if one frac-
tion is greater than, less than, or equal to
another fraction.
To obtain information about a students cur-
rent level of understanding as it relates to lesson
objectives, Harris uses a formative question
This example of a formative
question is from Uncovering
Student Thinking in Mathematics
(Rose, Minton, and Arline 2006).
F
I
G
U
R
E

3
Which fraction is greater?
Explain and justify your
reasoning.
1.
4
5
or
4
7
2.
4
5
or
2
5
3.
2
8
or
3
4
4.
1
3
or
2
6
at the end of the lesson (see g. 3). After class,
Harris examines the representations, explana-
tions, and justications given by his students
and determines that many of his students have
shown understanding of lesson objectives; how-
ever, some of those students seem to be in need
of assistance with language or behavior issues to
better interact with the mathematics. Moreover,
a handful of students have not shown under-
standing of the lesson objectives and seem to
seriously misunderstand fraction comparison
based on the part-to-whole length model used
in the lesson.
Types of differentiation,
assigning student groups
Results of the formative indicator questions
reveal that Harris has three different groups of
students needing three different types of prac-
tice or assessment opportunities in fraction
comparison. Two of those groups do not differ
in their understanding of the content that was
delivered during the lesson using the part-to-
whole length model that was provided, but they
differ in the support they need to further their
understanding. Harris decides to employ pro-
cess differentiation within one station, which
will give further support to students needing
assistance with language or behavioral issues
and will stretch the students who appear to
have a good understanding of the content and
244 November 2012 teaching children mathematics | Vol. 19, No. 4 www.nctm.org
Students who understand fraction equivalency through the part-to-whole
length model can take advantage of a task for additional practice and
extensions. For his Proof place, Harris adapts Measuring the World
(Addington and Dennis 2008).
F
I
G
U
R
E

4
The cooks at Rustys Pancake House were arguing over which mixture of orange juice
would make the strongest-tasting orange juice.
2 OJ to 1 water 2 OJ to 2 water 2 OJ to 4 water
Pete said the rst mixture would be stronger. Javier said the second mixture
would be stronger.

1. Is either of the cooks correct?
2. Explain Petes reasoning and why you feel he is correct or incorrect.
3. Explain Javiers reasoning and why you feel she is correct or incorrect.
can explain it completely. Because ve students
showed severe misunderstanding of fraction
comparison through the part-to-whole situa-
tions in the lesson, Harris decides to also use
content differentiation in a second station to
offer those students additional access to the
mathematical content of comparing fractions
through an alternative representation to under-
standing fraction comparison.
Designing practice or assessment tasks
Four stations are usually adequate to differenti-
ate practice or assessment. In this case, two were
appropriate.
Proof place station. To provide additional
practice and extension for the students who
understand fraction equivalency through the
part-to-whole length model, Harris will use
Proof place to present a mathematical situation
for students to prove. To design an appropriate
mathematical practice activity for students to
complete, Harris looks for a problem that offers
students the opportunity to demonstrate their
knowledge of part-to-whole situations using
length models. Further, he seeks to nd a task
that can provide higher-level thinking to extend
and build on students current understanding.
Harris finds Addington and Denniss (2008)
Measuring the World to be an ideal problem
situation, so he adapts it for his Proof place
station (see g. 4). Additionally, Harris provides
the task to students in paper form as well as on
an online blog where the question may be read
aloud to students in both English and Spanish.
Students may also use the blog to post their
answers using multiple formatsincluding
written forms and videosand respond to other
students posts. Thus, Harris has allowed for
student choice in accessing the task on the basis
of their style or preference in learning.
Teacher station. With the Proof place task
developed, Harris must now consider how to
approach instruction with the remaining ve
sudents who showed no understanding of frac-
tion comparison. He decides to use the Teacher
station to reteach the topic in small groups, using
a different model to differentiate content. Noting
that these students did not understand fraction
comparison through length models or part-to-
whole situations, Harris searches for an alternate
way to teach comparison that is mathemati-
cally relevant, will enable connections to future
content that students will learn, and will pro-
mote the same kinds of understanding that the
original lesson was created to promote. Exam-
ining the student questions from the original
www.nctm.org Vol. 19, No. 4 | UFBDIJOHDIJMESFONBUIFNBUJDTtNovember 2012 245
1. In which group would you receive more to eat?
A. B. Explain your reasoning.
A. B. Explain your reasoning.
2. In which group would you get more to eat?
1. In which group would you receive more to eat?
A. B. Explain your reasoning.
A. B. Explain your reasoning.
2. In which group would you get more to eat?
The teacher differentiates the content, but he uses sharing situations to build an
understanding of fraction comparison. Students meet the goal of understanding
fraction comparison but approach the goal using a different model.
F
I
G
U
R
E

5
lesson, Harris decides to reteach the topic to
students using sharing (quotient) situations (see
g. 5). With sharing situations, students use a
matching approach to understand and compare
fractional amounts. Although the content is dif-
ferentiated from the part-to-whole length model
used to develop understanding in the original
lesson, Harris uses sharing situations to build an
understanding of fraction comparison for stu-
dents who found the initial part-to-whole situa-
tions insufcient. The students are still meeting
the goal of understanding fraction comparison;
however, they are using a different model, or dif-
ferentiated content, to approach the goal.
Maximize learning, minimize
individual accommodations
All students are required to meet the academic
demands proposed in Curriculum Focal Points
(NCTM 2006) and the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics (CCSSI 2010). Teach-
ers in inclusive environments are charged with
delivering instruction that results in opportuni-
ties for all students to understand mathematics.
Using math stations to differentiate instruction
is a mechanism that maximizes learning for all
students while minimizing the need for indi-
vidual accommodations.
There is no need to change the content of
the curriculum for [diverse] students.
What must be done is what all good teachers
dopay close attention to the child and
how he or she learns and design instruction
(not content) that maximizes the strengths
of the child while minimizing the impact of
weaknesses. (Van de Walle 2004, p. 93)
In fact, differentiated math stations benefit
every learner by taking into consideration the
different ways that students learn mathematics
and how they can show that knowledge.
REFERENCES
Addington, Susan, and David Dennis. 2008.
Measuring the World: Mathematics for
Elementary and Middle School Teachers. San
Bernardino, CA: California State University.
Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI).
2010. Common Core State Standards for
Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Gov-
ernors Association Center for Best Practices
F
A
S
T

F
O
O
D
:

N
A
T
A
L
I
A

P
R
O
K
O
F
Y
E
V
A
/
V
E
E
R
;

K
I
D
S
:

Y
O
-
I
C
H
I
/
V
E
E
R
246 November 2012 teaching children mathematics | Vol. 19, No. 4 www.nctm.org
and the Council of Chief State School Ofcers.
http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_
Math%20Standards.pdf.
Hall, Tracey, Nicole Strangman, and Anne Meyer.
2003. Differentiated Instruction and Implica-
tions for UDL Implementation. Wakeeld,
MA: National Center on Accessing the General
Curriculum. http://www.cast.org/publications/
ncac/ncac_difnstructudl.html.
Mazzocco, Michele M. M., and Kathleen T. Devlin.
2008. Parts and Holes: Gaps in Rational
Number Sense among Students with vs.
without Mathematical Learning Disabilities.
Developmental Science 11 (5): 68191.
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics
(NCTM). 2000. Principles and Standards for
School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
. 2006. Curriculum Focal Points for Pre-
kindergarten through Grade 8 Mathematics:
A Quest for Coherence. Reston, VA: NCTM.
. 2010. Fun with Fractions. Illuminations:
Lessons, grades 35. http://illuminations.nctm
.org/LessonDetail.aspx? ID=L541.
Tobey, Cheryl Rose, Leslie G. Minton, and Caroline
B. Arline, eds. 2006. Uncovering Student
Thinking in Mathematics: 25 Assessment
Probes. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Tomlinson, Carol Ann. 1999. The Differentiated
Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All
Learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Van de Walle, John A. 2004. Elementary and
Middle School Mathematics: Teaching
Developmentally. Boston: Pearson.
Janet B. Andreasen, janet.andreasen@ucf.edu,
is an instructor of mathematics education at the
University of Central Florida. She is interested in using
technology in teaching mathematics and teacher
content knowledge as well as mathematical pedagogy
that meets the needs of all learners. Jessica H. Hunt,
Jessica.Hunt@ucf.edu, is a Ph.D. candidate in Excep-
tional Education at the University of Central Florida.
She is interested in how children with disabilities learn
mathematics and in meeting the needs of all learners
in the general education classroom.
NCTM EU
BOOKS
AD
For more information or to place an order,
please call (800) 235-7566 or visit www.nctm.org/catalog.
NEW
Developing Essential
Understanding of Addition
and Subtraction for Teaching
Mathematics in
Pre-KGrade 2
By Karen Karp,
Janet Caldwell,
and Jennifer
Bay-Williams
Stock #13792
List Price: $32.95
Member: $26.36
Whats the Big Idea?
Introducing Three New Titles in the Landmark Essential Understanding Series
Rose Mary Zbiek, Series Editor
NEW
Developing Essential
Understanding of
Multiplication and Division
for Teaching Mathematics in
Grades 35
By Albert Otto,
Janet Caldwell,
and Sarah
Wallus Hancock
Stock #13795
List Price: $32.95
Member: $26.36
NEW
Developing Essential
Understanding of
Mathematical Reasoning
for Teaching Mathematics
in Grades
Pre-K8
By John Lannin,
Amy Ellis, and
Rebekah Elliott
Stock #13794
List Price: $32.95
Member: $26.36
for Teaching Mathematics in
Grades 35
By Albert Otto,
Stock #13795
List Price: $32.95
Member: $26.36
for Teaching Mathematics for Teaching Mathematics in