Succeeding at Individualized Instruction: What, How, and What to Do

By Dr. Harry Bloom, Founder and President, Benchmarking for Good, Inc.

Ask day school parents what matters most and “teacher attention to my child’s individual needs” comes near the top every time. Ask them how their school is doing on it, and the answer is often less than flattering. Families notice the gap, and it shapes whether they stay.

This post draws on Benchmarking for Good’s survey data: 3,200 parents at 21 Jewish day schools, 1,866 high school students at 9 schools, and staff climate surveys from 17 of the parents’ schools. It asks three questions. What is the state of individualized instruction in our schools? How do the schools that do it best get there? And What to Do to close the gap.

What: a top priority, a bottom-third result

Day schools are falling short on individualized instruction, and students feel it more than parents do.

Parents rank it high and rate it low. 84% of parents call teacher attention to individual needs “very important,” third of 20 priorities. Only 45% are very satisfied with it. Among parents who call it very important, more than half are not very satisfied. The more concrete the question, the weaker the result. Out of 37 areas of school performance, parents rank:

• Support for students with learning differences: 31st

• Teaching methods that adapt to individual student needs: 32nd

• Support services for special learning needs: 33rd

• Enrichment for advanced students: 34th

Only sports, physical education and the arts score lower.

Students are less satisfied than their parents. High school students give “teachers paying attention to your individual learning needs” a net satisfaction score of −24, 26th of 28 areas. At the six schools where we surveyed both groups, parents scored the same item +29 and students −23. The gap was statistically significant at every one of those schools. Parents see the school’s intentions. Students see what happens in class.

It costs schools families. We compared families with their peers at the same school. Parents in the bottom third on individualization were three times as likely to have seriously considered leaving as those in the top third (40% vs 13%). Among students it was 25% vs 8%. Individualization is also closely tied to whether a family would recommend the school (within-school correlation ρ = .52).

The pattern holds across schools. Families whose children receive learning support rate individualization no lower than other families. Satisfaction slips with exposure: parents with longer tenure or more children enrolled are less satisfied, and so are students in higher grades. The first-year promise of attention to each child fades unless schools keep renewing it.

How: what the leading schools do differently

Four schools stand significantly above the network on parents’ individualization ratings. Two are non-Orthodox K–8 schools and two are Modern Orthodox schools. We compared them with the other 16 on everything parents, students and staff told us. Their advantage is concentrated in the academic program, learning support, student voice and family communication. It does not show up in religious programming, pay or workload.

Benchmarking for Good parent survey, 21 schools, 3,200 parents. All gaps shown except the last three are statistically significant.

1. They build the academic program around the individual child. Parents at the leading schools rate an innovative curriculum, general studies excellence and support for learning differences 30–40 points higher than parents elsewhere. Across all 20 schools these items track individualization closely (school-level correlations of .71 to .85). The leading schools also serve more children who receive learning support (38% of parents vs 25%), so their results don’t come from an easier population.

2. They take student voice seriously. “Treats feedback from students with respect” is the single item most closely tied to individualization across schools (ρ = .90). Every one of the four leaders beats the network on it. Students who feel heard are students whose teachers know what they need.

3. They reach out to families first. Parents at the leading schools rate proactive communication about their own child 26 points higher. Students at the two leading high schools rate both responsiveness and proactive communication about 20 points higher than students elsewhere. Staff at the leading schools rate their interactions with parents 18 points higher. Waiting for parents to call is not enough.

4. Students feel supported more than entertained. At the two leading high schools, students’ biggest advantages are in support services (+43 points) and a nurturing environment (+22). Engaging lessons, learning from feedback and enrichment were no different from other schools, and those students reported less honors and AP variety. Individualization grows out of support and relationships, not a longer course catalog.

5. Their teachers have the tools and work together. Staff at the leading schools rate the tools they’re given (+21), the work environment (+17) and collaboration (+16) higher than staff elsewhere. Salary, benefits, workload and flexibility are no better. These staff are even less likely to call a competitive salary very important.

The leaders don’t all get there the same way. Two lead on nearly everything, including a strong learning-support program. A third is only average on support services but excels at responsiveness, student voice and helping children learn from teacher feedback. That is individualization built into everyday classroom practice rather than run by a support department.

What to Do: recommendations for the field

Closing the gap takes work at every level. Here is where each group can start.

Heads of school and academic leaders

1. Treat learning support as a core program, not an add-on. It is where parents and students see the widest gap between leading schools and everyone else. Make it visible to families, staff it adequately, and connect it to classroom teaching.

2. Ask students, then show them what changed. Survey students at least once a year, take the results to faculty, and report back on what you did. Respect for student feedback is the strongest single marker of individualization we found.

3. Reach out to families before they reach out to you. Set an expectation that every family hears something specific about its own child from a teacher or advisor each term, not only report cards and problems.

4. Renew general studies. Families at most schools rate their general studies and innovative curriculum well below the leaders. Look at what the curriculum asks of teachers when students are at different levels.

5. Watch the later years. Satisfaction erodes with each year a family spends at the school and with each grade a student advances. Build check-ins for veteran families and upper grades, not only for newcomers.

Division heads and faculty

• Give teachers the tools, planning time and colleagues they need to differentiate. In our staff data, tools and collaboration separate the leading schools; pay does not.

• Back teachers when they talk with parents. Leading schools’ staff rate their interactions with parents far higher, which makes proactive communication sustainable.

Boards

• Add individualization measures to the head of school’s dashboard: parent and student satisfaction with attention to individual needs, and the share of families considering other schools.

• Fund support services and teacher tools as retention investments. Families in the bottom third on individualization are three times as likely to consider leaving.

Networks, funders and the wider field

• Benchmark students, not only parents. Students’ ratings run far below their parents’, and parent surveys alone overstate how well schools individualize.

• Help schools learn from one another. The leaders reach the result by different routes, some through strong support programs and some through classroom practice. Peer visits and shared practice can spread both.

How Benchmarking for Good Can Help Your School Improve Individualization

Benchmarking for Good offers and integrated suite of survey and benchmarking tools that can help your school craft its pathway to stronger individualized instruction. Contact harrybloom@benchmarkingforgood.org to discuss a comprehensive research program for your school.