School personnel are continually asked to choose between curricula, such as phonics vs. whole language, or skills vs. content. A uniform approach allows schools or districts to concentrate resources and professional development as well as to provide equitable assessment of student learning.

However, some schools out there skirt the uniform approach. Over the past five years, the EducationTrust has studied high-achieving schools that have large low-income populations. How do they do it? As one teacher said, "It's not rocket science. You figure out what you need to teach, and then you teach it."

For example, educators using the prescribed reading program in Fairfax County, Virginia, noticed that their students, most of whom do not speak English at home, had a great deal of difficulty deciphering words they hadn't seen before. Now teachers in kindergarten and first grade supplement their normal reading instruction with phonics, and students are meeting or exceeding state reading standards.

A New York middle school was expected to teach a curriculum that focused on skills rather than a set content. The teachers worked hard, yet the results were poor. The students at this middle school just didn't have the content knowledge to make the skills relevant. The principal brought the Core Knowledge program to the school and provided teachers with professional development to teach skills with content. Again, students are excelling.

I am impressed that these schools adapted their teaching to their students' needs. And, not to sound like a broken record, but isn't that what differentiation is all about?