differentiated instruction research studies

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Variables that influence teachers’ practice of differentiated instruction in chinese classrooms: a study from teachers’ perspectives.

1 Department of Educational Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
2 School for Educational Studies, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium

As the diversity of students increases, differentiated instruction (DI) serves an increasingly significant function in meeting their individual learning needs. Emerging research has highlighted the value of inclusive teaching approaches to address students’ differences, such as DI. Therefore, it is important to quantify teachers’ DI thoughts and behaviors in classroom teaching. This study follows the original Differentiated Instruction Questionnaire (DI-Quest) to investigate the factors that influence teachers’ practice of DI, taking into account their teaching experience, class sizes and school locations. The sample comprised 1,935 teachers from 150 national lower secondary schools in six provinces of central and western mainland China. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), scale reliability, and invariance testing were conducted to explore and verify the factor structure of a Chinese mainland version of the DI-Quest (CN-DI-Quest). The empirical findings indicate that CN-DI-Quest is a valid and reliable instrument for future study of teachers’ DI philosophies, principles, and practice. Moreover, the results of structural equation modeling revealed that teachers’ practice of DI (i.e., adaptive teaching) was explained largely by their ethical compass, flexible grouping, output = input, teaching experiences, and class size. Notably, teachers’ practice of DI (i.e., adaptive teaching) could not be predicted by growth mindset and school location. This study addresses gaps in the literature, since it provides empirical evidence regarding DI in Chinese mainland schools, offers material and suggestions for future research, and provides recommendations useful to the professional advancement of Chinese teachers, including training programs and professional support.

1. Introduction

Student diversity within classrooms is rising both consistently and globally and provides challenges with far-reaching implications. Educators must implement appropriate teaching strategies to bridge student differences and ensure that all students are given maximum opportunity to learn ( Unesco, 2017 ). Differentiated instruction (DI), which has emerged as an effective classroom practice for responding to individual differences and meeting students’ diverse learning needs, requires instructors to consider the differences among their students and to tailor their teaching practice in light of these ( Adebayo and Shumba, 2014 ; Dixon et al., 2014 ). This study investigates DI and in doing so, uses the definition proposed by Tomlinson (2014 , 2017) , who describes DI as both a teaching philosophy and classroom practice, in which teachers are responsive, proactive, and positive in their accommodation and leverage of students’ differences.

Ultimately, the successful practice of DI depends on teachers, and it is therefore necessary to understand the underlying variables that influence their DI practice. More specifically, many researchers have reported that teachers’ DI beliefs, teaching experience, and class size are strongly associated with their DI practice (e.g., Suprayogi et al., 2017 ; Whitley et al., 2019 ). However, such research in mainland China has rarely been conducted. Furthermore, research investigating the relationship between school location and DI practice remains rare. The current study aims to explore the impact of teachers’ belief, teaching experience, class size, and school location on their practice of DI, and thus to provide new empirical evidence from the Chinese context and valuable suggestions for teaching practice, training, and future research.

2. Background and literature review

The increasing diversification of classrooms is a global phenomenon ( Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ). However, the resulting challenges are perhaps more acute in China than elsewhere because, additionally, the Chinese government has introduced a policy named Learning in Regular Classrooms (LRC), which mandates the teaching of students with special educational needs in mainstream classrooms ( Cheng, 2005 ; Shi and Hua, 2007 ; Deng and Harris, 2008 ). Thus, Chinese teachers must address and cater for a wide range of differences among learners, and ensure that all students have the best possible opportunities to learn ( Yan and Hua, 2020 ). Clearly, DI is applicable here, and fortunately, the broad concept of DI is not new for Chinese teachers. A traditional Confucian belief, that education should be delivered in accordance with students’ individual characteristics and learning needs, has given the country a valuable platform upon which to build a modern iteration of DI ( Lam et al., 2002 ). However, the development of the Confucian concept of education did not occur systematically, and until recently, it was seen as a somewhat abstract teaching principle. Furthermore, while modern DI has been empirically tested and frequently implemented in the West ( Tomlinson, 1999 , 2014 ), until now, most assessment of DI in Chinese societies has been conducted in Hong Kong (e.g., Yuen et al., 2022 ) and Taiwan (e.g., Hung and Chao, 2021 ), with little evidence gleaned from the Chinese mainland. Hence, this study hopes to provide a new viewpoint and understanding of teachers’ practice of DI on the Chinese mainland, and to explore the factors that influence teachers’ DI practice through connection of the original DI-Quest variables with teaching experience, class size, and school location (for which more detail is given in section 2.2).

2.1. The differentiated instruction-quest model

Since teachers play a significant role in DI, instruments have been developed to measure teachers’ DI practice, including the Differentiated Instruction Scale ( Roy et al., 2013 ), DI practice ( Letzel, 2019 ), and the DI-Quest instrument ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ). Since the DI-Quest was developed to describe the extent to which teachers’ thought and performance by emphasizing their DI philosophies and principles, and was validated in Belgian ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ) and Hong Kong ( Yuen et al., 2022 ) schools, it was chosen for use in this study, as the main instrument to explore Chinese teachers’ DI philosophies and practices.

The DI-Quest model ( Table 1 ) comprises five constructs: growth mindset, ethical compass, flexible grouping, output = input, and adaptive teaching (i.e., adaptive to students’ differences in readiness, interests, and learning profiles, which are, in turn, identified as three factors in the model; Coubergs et al., 2017 ). The first two constructs (i.e., growth mindset and ethical compass) are categorized as teachers’ philosophies of DI; the subsequent two (i.e., flexible grouping and output = input) are categorized as teachers’ principles on how to organize DI teaching; the last construct (i.e., adaptive teaching) is the practice of DI whereby teachers differentiate their practice according to students’ interests, readiness, and learning profiles ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ). The last factor is considered crucial, since it acts as the “core function” of DI, implying that the core concept of the DI framework includes students’ learning differences in terms of interests, readiness, and learning profiles ( Tomlinson and Moon, 2014 ; Tomlinson, 2017 ). Thus, the other four factors may be utilized to predict the last factor ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ).

Table 1 . The description of DI-Quest instrument.

2.1.1. Philosophies of differentiated instruction: Growth mindset and ethical compass

According to the definition provided by Dweck (2006) , growth mindset is an implicit belief concerning the stability of capability. Teachers with a growth mindset generally embrace students’ interests, readiness, and learning profiles as the basis for differentiating their teaching, which may lead students to achieve at higher levels than they have done, or would do, otherwise ( Hattie, 2005 ; Coubergs et al., 2017 ). In contrast, teachers who maintain a fixed mindset are more likely to believe that students’ learning success is determined by their attributes, such as talents and intelligence. Those with fixed mindsets may consider intellectual capability as static, and attach little, if any, significance to the skills and effort applied by their students ( Lynott and Woolfolk, 1994 ). Consequently, in the classroom environment, they use controlling teaching practices, rather than devise a competitive learning environment ( Lambert, 1999 ).

The term ethical compass refers to whether teachers consider the (a) curriculum or (b) their observation of the students’ learning as a compass for teaching ( Tomlinson and Imbeau, 2010 ). It reflects how flexibly a teacher adapts the curriculum and makes adjustments that meet students’ learning needs ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ). Teachers who restrict their approach to strict pursuit of the curriculum, without regard to learners’ needs, may assume that student performance depends on external factors, such as government policies and regulation, structure, or discipline ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ). Therefore, teachers with curriculum-centered beliefs are less inclined to differentiate their classroom teaching. However, teachers who tailor their instructions more precisely, writing lesson plans and designing exploratory activities to expedite students’ learning goals, are said to hold student-centered beliefs ( Tomlinson and Imbeau, 2010 ).

2.1.2. Principles of differentiated instruction: Flexible grouping and output = input

Teachers who are proficient in DI practice should plan student study groups with a flexible approach ( Tomlinson, 2001 ); flexible grouping refers to a practice of grouping students homogeneously and heterogeneously according to the learners and targets involved, and of switching these groups flexibly in classrooms so that students experience both independent learning and work in various cooperative groups ( Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). Flexible grouping lets teachers monitor and evaluate students in various learning contexts, via provision of diverse learning materials and target tasks ( Tomlinson, 2001 ; Whitburn, 2001 ). Research indicates that flexible grouping of students tends to work best when used with appropriately differentiated materials, profiles, methods, activities, and learning goals ( Tieso, 2005 ; Aliakbari and Haghighi, 2014 ).

Output = input refers to the principle that teachers should plan their teaching (input) according to students’ classroom performance (output), which helps teachers to understand their students’ learning progress and assist them accordingly ( Hall, 2002 ). Successful practice of DI requires teachers to provide students with ongoing feedback on their performance, both during and after classroom activities ( Hattie, 2012 ). This also helps teachers to prepare appropriately for subsequent lessons ( Hattie, 2009 ). The notion that the application of adaptive teaching should be based on the learning differences of learners and appropriate feedback is confirmed in the work of Coubergs et al. (2017) .

2.1.3. Practice of differentiated instruction: Adaptive teaching to accommodate learning differences

The term adaptive teaching refers to the proactive and positive actions that teachers take in response to students’ learning needs ( Parsons, 2008 ). According to Tomlinson et al. (2003) , teachers can do helpfully adapt their teaching practices in light of three specific types of learning need, namely, readiness, interests, and learning profiles. Thus, to accommodate differences in students’ readiness to study, their previous knowledge could be linked to their learning goals in fields of study, subject areas, and topics based on their current learning status ( Woolfolk, 2010 ). By taking differences in readiness into account, teachers can provide greater possibilities for every learner to achieve the present and desired levels of learning. In addition, the need to respond to students’ interests suggests teachers should offer topics, contents, or activities that interest students, since this is associated with positive learning experiences, greater levels of student engagement, and productivity ( Eisenberger and Shanock, 2003 ; Woolfolk, 2010 ). Finally, the differences exhibited by students in terms of learning profiles indicate diverse approaches or modes of learning that consider the combined outcomes of several factors; for instance, contexts, topics, gender, and intelligence ( Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). Teaching that caters for the differences between students’ learning profiles is likely to improve their outcomes considerably ( Perry et al., 2004 ).

2.2. Variables influencing differentiated instruction practice

The literature indicates that the practice of DI and accommodation of differences in readiness, interests, and learning profiles can exert a positive influence on students’ academic achievement, classroom engagement, learning interests, enthusiasm, and self-confidence (e.g., Tulbure, 2011 ; Bal, 2016 ; Eysink et al., 2017 ). However, this process is not necessarily straightforward, and research has reported a set of complex variables, at both teacher-levels and context-levels, that influence teachers’ practice of DI.

Teachers’ belief in DI greatly affects their DI practice in classrooms. Studies have reported that the instructional outcomes of teachers, such as their actions and decisions in the classroom, are guided by their educational ideas, thoughts, and opinions ( He and Levin, 2008 ; Cross, 2009 ). Whitley et al. (2019) conducted mixed methods research within K-12 settings and found a significant correlation between teachers’ DI beliefs and their DI practices. Suprayogi et al. (2017) found similar in a survey of 604 teachers, stating that teachers’ differing beliefs in constructivist ideas and self-efficacy hinder the practice of DI. Furthermore, a case study of eight teachers revealed that teachers’ classroom practice is enhanced by their positive perceptions of DI ( Sibanda, 2021 ), and that teaching experience is a factor affecting DI practice ( Casey, 2011 ; Dixon et al., 2014 ). Teachers with at least 5 years’ experience applied DI more often than their less experienced peers ( Davis, 2013 ). Corresponding outcomes were reported by Sheehan (2011) , who found that teachers with at least 8 years’ experience maintained a positive attitude toward DI practice, while Burkett (2013) also linked teaching experience to the use of DI strategies. Generally speaking, the literature has suggested that experienced teachers use a more extensive range of educational practices, which helps them to optimize their DI instructions and strategies ( Liu et al., 2010 ; Ginja and Chen, 2020 ). However, some scholars have claimed that teaching experience has no significant correlation with DI practice (e.g., Donnell and Gettinger, 2015 ; Merawi, 2018 ).

Moreover, the practice of DI is intricately associated with classroom size and school location. Large class size has been identified as a barrier to implementing DI (e.g., Wan, 2016 ; De Jager, 2017 ). Often, as class size increases so does diversity in students and learning needs ( Dixon et al., 2014 ). This makes class management more complicated for teachers, who accordingly refrain from using DI ( Aldossari, 2018 ; Moosa and Shareefa, 2019 ). Regarding school location, few studies have examined the correlations among DI practice, student performance, and teacher-related parameters in rural or urban schools ( D'Angelo, 2006 ; Wu, 2017 ; Goddard and Kim, 2018 ; Goddard et al., 2019 ). Until recently, it was unknown whether teachers’ DI practice varied between rural and urban schools, or whether school location is an influential variable in teachers’ DI. A recent study has explored factors affecting DI practice in the rural and urban schools but found no significant difference between them ( Lavania and Nor, 2021 ).

3. Materials and methods

3.1. research questions.

Following the DI-Quest model, this study aims to examine the effect of teachers’ self-reported DI philosophies and principles on their DI practice, while considering their teaching experiences, class size, and school location (see Figure 1 ). Two research questions are posed:

Figure 1 . The conceptual research model of this study.

1. Are the five-factor structures of the original DI-Quest instrument fit for Chinese mainland schoolteachers?

2. How do teachers’ philosophies, principles, teaching experience, class sizes, and school locations relate to their self-reported DI practice?

3.2. Research context and procedure

For this large-scale study, we selected six provinces in central and western China as the research area. All districts in the research area have been supported by government programs to encourage the use of DI, and participating schools were selected randomly, without considering the student number, class size, and geographical locations within the selected provinces. The study was conducted in national lower secondary schools ( OECD, 2021 ), which provide the final 3 years of compulsory education for Chinese students, culminating in the national upper secondary school selection examination.

The study ran from September 2019 to December 2019. The researcher presented the research proposal to the school authorities and requested their participation through emails and/or calls. Some declined, questioning the inclusion of political elements in the questionnaire. However, once the expression of two items (items 9 and 11) had been modified and permission secured from the principals, an online hyperlink was emailed to school principals, who then invited teachers from Grades 7–9 to complete the survey voluntarily, in their spare time.

3.3. Sample size and demographics

We used the online Raosoft sample size calculation methodology to determine the sample size; it suggested a minimum of 1,676 participants (margin error alpha = 0.03, the confidence level is = 99%, total population = 20,000, the response of distribution = 65%; Raosoft, 2004 ). Therefore, 1,935 teachers were invited to participate, from 150 schools in six provinces throughout central and western China. Approximately 1,694 teachers from national lower secondary schools provided the information for every variable. After deletion of unusable data, 1,689 responses were used for further analysis.

Of the valid responses, 1,040 were from female teachers and 649 from male teachers. Most teachers (1,479) had a bachelor’s degree while the number of teachers holding under bachelor and master’s degrees was small. 758 teachers had over 20 years of teaching experience. Respondents’ class sizes ranged from 15 to 79 students: a class with more than 55 students is considered a large class—in China, the average class size is 45 for elementary schools and 50 for lower secondary schools ( Jiacheng and Jing, 2013 ). Respondents having class sizes of 15–40 and 41–55 were 24.6 and 59.6%, respectively. Large classes (>56) accounted for 15.7%. Regarding geographical distribution, 29% of the sample worked at rural schools; teachers working in town and city schools constituted 47.4 and 23.6%, respectively ( Table 2 ).

Table 2 . Demographic characteristics of the samples.

3.4. Research instrument

The online questionnaire survey comprised two parts: (i) basic demographic information and (ii) the DI-Quest instrument. Data on the background variables of teachers and schools, including gender, age, academic qualification, years of teaching experience, class size, and school location, were collected. In the event, that the respondents taught more than two classes, the variable (class size) chosen was the class with the largest number of students. The second part of the questionnaire comprised the original version of the DI-Quest instrument ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ), whereby teachers report the extent to which they differentiate their practices in classrooms according to the philosophies and principles of DI. The instrument was launched in Belgium ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ), then validated in Hong Kong ( Yuen et al., 2022 ). It comprises five dimensions with 31 items. An ordinal frequency rating scale (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree; 1 = never, 5 = always) is used to measure growth mindset, ethical compass, and flexible grouping, as well as output = input and adaptive teaching. Notably, since the two items of growth mindset and six items of ethical compass express the reverse meaning, these items were reversed for further analyses. Table 1 shows the number of items and example items for each dimension.

3.4.1. Translation of the differentiated instruction-quest instrument

We used forward-backward translation procedures to translate the original DI-Quest instrument ( Behling and Law, 2000 ). The first author translated the initial version into Chinese, then invited two professors in educational fields and one expert in Linguistics to proofread it. Following discussion, minor changes in wording and expression were made to clarify the meaning and linkage with the (Chinese national lower secondary school) context. The Chinese version of the DI-Quest instrument was then given to another two Chinese experts in education, who translated it back into English. The first author and two professors worked together to compare and check these two translations, and differences between versions were discussed until an agreement was reached.

3.5. Data analysis

This study firstly assessed whether the univariate and multivariate normality of the data obtained met the general requirements. Regarding univariate normality, no standardized skewness (range − 0.935 to 0.180) and kurtosis (range − 0.851 to 1.885) values for each item fell outside the range of −3 to +3, indicating that no violation of univariate normality existed ( Kim, 2013 ). Regarding multivariate normality, the Mardia’s multivariate kurtosis (MK) test showed a significant result (MK = 202.925; z-statistic = 91.64, p < 0.001). The expected value of multivariate kurtosis can be calculated through a formula, p (p + 2), in which p refers to the number of observed variables ( Cain et al., 2017 ). After comparing the observed value and expected MK, we found deviation from multivariate normality in this study. We used maximum likelihood estimation (MLR) to deal with the deviation in the subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), since it produced robust standard errors and rescaled test statistics ( Curran et al., 1996 ).

Concerning the first research question, to examine the psychometric properties of the DI-Quest instrument in the Chinese mainland school context, one-half of the data set ( n = 845) was randomly selected for the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in SPSS 26, to identify the factor structure of the 31 items. The rest of the data set ( n = 844) was evaluated with CFA in Mplus 8.7, to confirm the factor structure through EFA. Before employing EFA, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were applied, to demonstrate sampling adequacy ( Pallant, 2020 ). For the EFA, principal component analysis (PCA) with an oblique rotation method was used to verify the structure of the 31 items ( Fabrigar and Wegener, 2012 ). Factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 ( Kaiser, 1960 ) and factor loadings above 0.4 were retained ( Tabachnick et al., 2013 ). Furthermore, CFA was used to identify the factor solution from EFA, and criteria for evaluating the model fit were: Satorra-Bentler Scaled Chi-Square to degrees of freedom ratios (SBχ 2 /dƒ) <0.3, a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) <0.08, comparative fit index (CFI) >0.9, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) >0.9, and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) <0.08 ( Hu and Bentler, 1999 ). In addition to EFA and CFA, scale reliability was measured through computation of the Coefficient H, since the estimate of Cronbach’s alpha of checking the internal reliability of the factor structures usually generates the lowest possible value ( Sijtsma, 2009 ).

We also conducted invariance testing of the factor structure across gender, age, and school location, using multi-group CFA. The steps of configural, metric, and scalar were included in measurement invariance tests. The differences in CFI (ΔCFI) and RMSEA (ΔRMSEA) were calculated for examination of differences in model fit. If the value of (ΔCFI) is ≤0.01, and the value of RMSEA is <0.05, the hypothesis of invariance should be accepted ( Cheung and Rensvold, 2002 ). Subsequently, descriptive statistics and a correlation matrix for CN-DI-Quest were reported.

For the second research question, we used a structural equation modeling in Mplus to explore the impacts of teachers’ philosophies (i.e., growth mindset and ethical compass), principles (i.e., flexible groping and output = input), teaching experience, class size, and school location upon their reported DI practice (i.e., adaptive teaching).

4.1. Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, scale reliability, and invariance testing

Regarding data suitability, the value of KMO measurement and Bartlett’s test of sphericity gave significant results (KMO = 0.920, χ 2 (465) = 14719.493, df = 465, p ≤ 0.001; Pallant, 2020 ). A five-factor solution was yielded through the initial eigenvalue analysis based on the aforementioned factor and item retention criteria. These five factors accounted for 16.59, 14.01, 13.36%, 13.38, and 11.01% of the variance, respectively ( Table 3 ). Four items from the original DI-Quest questionnaire were eliminated (EC2, FG4, FG8, and AP4), because their factor loadings had values lower than 0.4 ( Tabachnick et al., 2013 ). The 27 retained items were re-ordered and the standardized factor loading values can be found in Table 4 . Based on the five constructs with 27 items identified in EFA, we conducted CFA to further validate them ( Figure 2 ). No further items were deleted, and sufficient fit was derived from the CFA modeling (SBχ 2 = 675.823, df = 314, CFI = 0.967; TLI = 0.963; RMSEA = 0.037; SRMR = 0.033; Table 5 ; Hu and Bentler, 1999 ).

Table 3 . The factor loadings in EFA for the initial and final round.

Table 4 . Standardized factor loading and scale reliability.

Figure 2 . The measurement model of Chinese version DI-Quest instrument; N = 844. Coefficients presented are standardized estimates.

Table 5 . Fit indices for the model 1 and model 2.

We also tested scale reliability, and the score of Coefficient H ranged from 0.89 to 0.93, indicating that the Chinese version of the DI-Quest instrument is highly reliable ( Table 5 ). Regarding invariance testing, as mentioned earlier, strong invariance was achieved for three groups (i.e., gender, age, and school location) after comparing the results of configural, metric, and scalar steps in this study ( Table 6 ).

Table 6 . Results of invariance analysis.

4.2. Descriptive results

Table 7 shows descriptive results and correlations between research variables. The average mean for each variable ranged from 2.65 to 3.75. Adaptive teaching and output = input achieved the same (and highest) score. A significant correlation existed between the flexible grouping of Chinese lower secondary school teachers alongside output = input and adaptive teaching, accompanied by the growth mindset of teachers. A moderate correlation was observed between flexible grouping and output = input; otherwise, low correlation values were observed.

Table 7 . Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients between DI variables.

4.3. Predictors of differentiated instruction practice (i.e., adaptive teaching)

Structural modeling results indicated that an acceptable conceptual model (SBχ 2 = 1132.465, df = 412, SBχ 2 /df = 2.749, CFI = 0.970, TLI = 0.966, SRMR = 0.050, RMSEA = 0.032). Flexible grouping, output = input, ethical compass, teaching experience, and class size largely explained teachers’ DI practice ( R 2 = 62.3%; Figure 3 ). Table 8 shows that the effects of output = input, flexible grouping, teaching experience, and class size on teachers’ DI practice were statistically significant, and these variables served a beneficial function in the model. However, the results of the impact of growth mindset and school location on DI practice were not significant; ethical compass was observed to have a negative impact on DI practice.

Figure 3 . Structural equation modeling of the conceptual model; N = 1,689. School location 1: Town (Base = rural schools); School location 2: City (Base = rural). Standardized path estimates are reported. The path estimates in solid line that were significant while estimates in dashed line were not significant.

Table 8 . Direct effects of teachers’ growth mindset, ethical compass, flexible grouping, output = input, teaching experience, class size, and school location on DI practice (i.e., adaptive teaching).

5. Discussion

As the first study to explore teachers’ DI practice in Chinese mainland schools, this study extends previous work, which has lacked understanding of Chinese teachers’ perceptions and implementation of DI. Most prior research has not developed and validated DI-related instruments in non-Western counties, and although the DI-Quest had been studied in Hong Kong schools ( Yuen et al., 2022 ), a replication study in the context of Chinese mainland schools was needed, since the school cultures and educational systems of Hong Kong and China differ ( Malinen et al., 2012 ). Therefore, the current study makes up for this deficiency and fills a gap in the literature by adding the experiences of Chinese mainland schoolteachers to the extant literature on DI.

5.1. Factor structures in the Chinese mainland version of the DI-Quest

This study is the first examine the psychometric properties of the DI-Quest instrument in the context of Chinese mainland lower secondary schools. The CN-DI-Quest verified the same five factors as the original and Hong Kong versions ( Coubergs et al., 2017 ; Yuen et al., 2022 ). This study omitted four items, which contrasts with Yuen et al. (2022) , who removed 12. Reviewing the items eliminated from the original instrument helped us, in some cases, to better understand DI in Chinese mainland schools. For example, EC2 ( “The curriculum is overloaded on content and goals” ) and AP4 ( “Every student will receive the same assessment” ); these two items may have suggested that Chinese teachers are curriculum-oriented and teacher-centered, but DI, according to the theory, should be oriented to students ( Tomlinson and Imbeau, 2010 ). Regarding the other two deleted items, FG4 ( “During my lessons , students need to work together in order to progress in their learning process” ) and FG8 ( “I differentiate by switching between working with heterogeneous and homogeneous groups” ) implied that Chinese teachers may not consider flexible grouping strategy during their DI implementation. This may be explained by the class sizes in Chinese mainland schools. As Table 2 shows, 75.3% of classes in this study contained more than 40 students. So many students in one classroom make it difficult for teachers to group them flexibly, due to the increased diversity, number of groups formed, challenges to classroom management, and time taken for interaction between students and the teacher (e.g., Suprayogi et al., 2017 ; Aldossari, 2018 ). Another plausible explanation is that Chinese mainland teachers are discouraged from grouping students flexibly, which is supported by Gaitas and Martins (2017) who reported that teachers encounter barriers to the adjustment of teaching procedure and classroom management when grouping students during teaching.

5.2. Predictors of teachers’ differentiated instruction practice

This study has also shown that Chinese mainland teachers’ DI philosophies, principles, teaching experience, and class size have a significant impact on their self-reported DI practice (adaptive teaching). We achieved this by connecting the DI-Quest instrument with teacher-levels and context-level variables. Our findings indicate that flexible grouping is an essential predictor of teachers’ DI practice in the context of schools in China, which is not surprising, since other studies have found that teachers who prefer to flexibly group students in heterogeneous and homogeneous combinations tend to use DI more often ( Tomlinson et al., 2003 ; Ford, 2005 ; Coubergs et al., 2017 ). To adopt DI practice, teachers must become skilled in switching groups in various ways; this corresponds with the research findings whereby the integration of diverse forms of flexible grouping strategy helps students to achieve learning outcomes at appropriate levels ( Whitburn, 2001 ; Castle et al., 2005 ).

The results of this study have also reported that the second predictor of the practice of DI is output = input; this indicates that teachers are more likely to use differentiation techniques in their practice if they consider the feedback from, and evaluation of, students as teaching resources on which to base their next lesson plans. This study’s findings are consistent with those of Coubergs et al. (2017) and Griful-Freixenet et al. (2021) , both of whom identified output = input as a strong variable to explain DI practice. The logic behind the DI theoretical framework also explains this positive outcome, in which teachers are assisted by continuous assessment at every stage of instruction to adapt both teaching and learning plans to the needs of students ( Hall, 2002 ; Tomlinson and Moon, 2014 ).

This study indicated that teaching experience was found to be the third predictor of DI practice. The experienced teachers, namely those with more than 5 years of teaching behind them, who took part in this research have higher levels of DI philosophy and practice. This contradicts the findings of McMillan (2011) , but corroborates Garrett (2017) and Suprayogi et al. (2017) assertion that novice teachers with less than 5 years’ experience were associated with a lower frequency of DI practice. This may be explained by the professional development and training of teachers ( VanTassel-Baska et al., 2008 ; Suprayogi et al., 2017 ), whereby only after years of training and experience can teachers integrate DI-related content and knowledge to move from fact-based programs to authentic investigations and become an educational subject matter expert ( Moosa and Shareefa, 2019 ). Novice teachers are trained in DI during initial teacher training, since at that stage most lack insight concerning relevant variations among students or cannot identify differentiation needs ( Dack and Triplett, 2020 ). Class size was also reported to predict DI practice significantly in this study. This confirmed the findings of Tomlinson et al. (2003) and Suprayogi et al. (2017) , in which DI practice is acutely required, to accommodate students’ differences in larger classes, possibly because an increase in student numbers increases the extent diversity in students and learning needs ( Dixon et al., 2014 ), which requires teachers to adopt more differentiated approaches to addressing such large-scale learning diversity ( Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ).

Another predictor in this study was teachers’ ethical compass, which had a negative impact on DI practice. This resonates with the findings of Coubergs et al. (2017) and Griful-Freixenet et al. (2021) , who have stated that teachers who focus on students’ learning to guide their teaching practices rather than use unquestioning compliance with the curriculum as a teaching guide, seemed to use more differentiation in their practice. These findings echo Tomlinson (2014) , wherein DI is integrated with a high-quality curriculum in accordance with students’ needs. Therefore, if teachers focus primarily on external variables such as discipline or curriculum structure, they tend to adopt traditional practices without considering students’ needs ( Nowell, 1992 ; Coubergs et al., 2017 ).

6. Limitations and recommendations for future research

While this study is a pioneering work that explores the impact of teachers’ DI philosophies and principles on their DI practice in the Chinese mainland, it has been subject to certain limitations that could be mitigated in future research.

Firstly, the DI-Quest instrument in this study was a self-reporting survey, which may have prompted some teachers to give socially desirable, rather than completely accurate, responses. The use of other research methods, such as classroom observation, videos, and individual and group interviews, may overcome this shortcoming. Also, Graham et al. (2021) argued that more DI research should be conducted in diverse countries around the world. Consequently, replication studies using the DI-Quest should be conducted in different school areas and contexts.

The present study uses a cross-sectional design, which limits the capacity to demonstrate causal interpretations; we recommend that longitudinal and experimental research studies should be conducted, to reveal more about DI in Chinese mainland schools. Furthermore, this study has surveyed only teachers working in central and western China; regional differences are among the variables that generate disparity in Chinese education ( Yang et al., 2014 ), and further research could invite respondents from eastern China, and assess whether outcomes are similar there.

Additionally, this study has focused on teachers’ perceptions of their DI philosophies and practices according to the DI-Quest model; however, in the classroom setting, students are critical. Future research might helpfully explore is how students perceive the differentiated teaching practices deployed by their teachers since consideration of students’ experiences in the course of DI practice helps teachers to hone their approaches ( Pozas et al., 2021 ).

Finally, previous studies have reported that other variables, like teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes toward DI, are predictors of DI (e.g., Coubergs et al., 2017 ; Letzel et al., 2020 ). Hence, future empirical studies should connect more extensive quantitative instrumentation, including measures of teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes toward DI, with the DI-Quest instrument, together to understand teachers’ DI practice.

7. Conclusions and implications

This study provides a novel, valid and reliable instrument for future research of DI in mainland Chinese contexts. In this regard, the findings of this study have confirmed the importance and significance of the DI-Quest in non-Western countries, which will support further comparative studies between mainland China and Western countries. The current study also offers implications for educational officers to concentrate on the professional advancement of teachers with regard to DI, as (1) teachers’ flexible grouping, output = input, and teaching experiences influence their DI practice positively and significantly; (2) the role of ethical compass in teachers’ DI practice is negative. Thus, a feasible approach to actualizing DI is through further assistance, such as professional advancement. Specifically, teachers are expected to undertake training programs and learn how to organize various forms of grouping and evaluation strategies to enhance their DI practice and meet students’ learning needs. To gain proficiency in such skills, teachers must learn when and where to offer differentiated instructions and feedback ( Lambert, 1999 ; Lawrence-Brown, 2004 ). According to Hall (2002) , assessment plays an essential role in DI, and it requires teachers to have a deep understanding of their students; that understanding also functions as the starting point for the diagnosis of students’ differences in readiness, interest, and learning styles. Therefore, through a measure of pre-assessment, teachers can adapt their teaching to respond to students’ learning status and assist students accordingly ( Tomlinson, 2001 ; Hall, 2002 ).

Moreover, to ensure that teachers’ perceptions in terms of ethical compass are oriented to students, rather than the curriculum, it is essential that teachers partake in regular discussions and collaborations about learners’ differences, curriculum adaptation, teaching objectives, and/or subject knowledge ( Tomlinson et al., 2003 ; Woolfolk, 2010 ). Following exchanges of experience, teachers may adjust their curriculum-oriented beliefs and accept the varied characteristics of their students, thereby connecting their perceived insights to classroom reality ( Eisenberger and Shanock, 2003 ; Hattie, 2005 ). In this regard, school leaders should support and encourage teachers to adopt DI by cultivating an inclusive learning atmosphere. Furthermore, the significance of developing professional skills for teachers in accordance with actual teaching experience is reiterated by Bandura (1977) . Teachers who have personally experienced the advantages and accomplishments of DI can put that experience to good use; it is extremely significant to consider reflections on previous teaching experiences, as well as interaction with peers ( Wertheim and Leyser, 2002 ; He and Levin, 2008 ).

To conclude, this study has validated the DI-Quest instrument in a mainland Chinese school context and has explored the extent of teachers’ DI practice by addressing their DI philosophies and principles. The CN-DI-Quest appears to be a promising instrument for future research, and retains the five-factor structure of the original and Hong Kong versions, with good reliability and validity. Chinese educators may consider how best to use this instrument to understand teachers’ perceptions of DI and to improve their DI skills through school-based DI professional development programs. Furthermore, the research method in this study (structural equation modeling) can be implemented in various school contexts, to explore the influence of teachers’ philosophies, principles, teaching experiences, class size, and school location on their DI practice.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author contributions

MB conceived the idea of this study, collected data online, processed data by using SPSS and MPLUS, and wrote the full manuscript. KS was a promoter who was responsible for mentoring and reviewing the whole process of writing this article. CZ worked as the co-promoter for editing the original draft. All authors provided the critical feedback and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Adebayo, A. S., and Shumba, C. B. (2014). An assessment of the implement of differentiated instruction in primary schools, Kabwe District, Zambia. Eur. Sci. J. 10, 295–307. doi: 10.19044/esj.2014.v10n7p%25p

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Aldossari, A. T. (2018). The challenges of using the differentiated instruction strategy: a case study in the general education stages in Saudi Arabia. Int. Educ. Stud. 11, 74–83. doi: 10.5539/ies.v11n4p74

Aliakbari, M., and Haghighi, J. K. (2014). On the effectiveness of differentiated instruction in the enhancement of Iranian learners reading comprehension in separate gender education. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 98, 182–189. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.405

Bal, A. P. (2016). The effect of the differentiated teaching approach in the algebraic learning field on students’ academic achievements. Eurasian. J. Educ. Res. 16, 185–204. doi: 10.14689/ejer.2016.63.11

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84, 191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Behling, O., and Law, K. S. (2000). Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Google Scholar

Burkett, J. A. (2013). Teacher perception on differentiated instruction and its influence on instructional practice . Doctoral dissertation. Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University.

Cain, M. K., Zhang, Z., and Yuan, K.-H. (2017). Univariate and multivariate skewness and kurtosis for measuring non-normality: prevalence, influence and estimation. Behav. Res. Methods 49, 1716–1735. doi: 10.3758/s13428-016-0814-1

Casey, M. (2011). Perceived efficacy and preparedness of beginning teachers to differentiate instruction . Master thesis. Providence, RI: Johnson & Wales University.

Castle, S., Deniz, C. B., and Tortora, M. (2005). Flexible grouping and student learning in a high-needs school. Educ. Urban Soc. 37, 139–150. doi: 10.1177/0013124504270787

Cheng, X. (2005). 新课程视野下的差异教学 [differentiated instruction under new curriculum]. 教育探索 9, 13–15.

Cheung, G. W., and Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 9, 233–255. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

Coubergs, C., Struyven, K., Vanthournout, G., and Engels, N. (2017). Measuring teachers’ perceptions about differentiated instruction: the DI-quest instrument and model. Stud. Educ. Eval. 53, 41–54. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.02.004

Cross, D. I. (2009). Alignment, cohesion, and change: examining mathematics teachers’ belief structures and their influence on instructional practices. J. Math. Teach. Educ. 12, 325–346. doi: 10.1007/s10857-009-9120-5

Curran, P. J., West, S. G., and Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to non-normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol. Methods 1, 16–29. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16

Dack, H., and Triplett, N. (2020). Novice social studies teachers’ implementation of differentiation: a longitudinal multi-case study. Theory Res. Soc. Educ. 48, 32–73. doi: 10.1080/00933104.2019.1640149

D'Angelo, F. D. (2006). Differentiated instruction: Effects on reading comprehension in the urban elementary school setting . Doctoral dissertation. Scottsdale, AZ: Northcentral University.

Davis, T. C. (2013). Differentiation of instruction in regular education elementary classes: An investigation of faculty and educational leaders' perceptions of differentiated instruction in meeting the needs of diverse learners . Lafayette: University of Louisiana at Lafayette.

De Jager, T. (2017). Perspectives of teachers on differentiated teaching in multi-cultural south African secondary schools. Stud. Educ. Eval. 53, 115–121. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.004

Deng, M., and Harris, K. (2008). Meeting the needs of students with disabilities in general education classrooms in China. Teach. Educ. Spec. Educ. 31, 195–207. doi: 10.1177/0888406408330631

Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., and Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. J. Educ. Gift. 37, 111–127. doi: 10.1177/0162353214529042

Donnell, L. A., and Gettinger, M. (2015). Elementary school teachers' acceptability of school reform: contribution of belief congruence, self-efficacy, and professional development. Teach. Teach. Educ. 51, 47–57. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.003

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success . New York, NY: Random House.

Eisenberger, R., and Shanock, L. (2003). Rewards, intrinsic motivation, and creativity: a case study of conceptual and methodological isolation. Creat. Res. J. 15, 121–130. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2003.9651404

Eysink, T. H., Hulsbeek, M., and Gijlers, H. (2017). Supporting primary school teachers in differentiating in the regular classroom. Teach. Teach. Educ. 66, 107–116. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.002

Fabrigar, L. R., and Wegener, D. T. (2012). Exploratory factor analysis . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ford, M. P. (2005). Differentiation through flexible grouping: successfully reaching all readers NCREL doi: 10.2307/3150980

Gaitas, S., and Martins, M. (2017). Teacher perceived difficulty in implementing differentiated instructional strategies in primary school. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 21, 544–556. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2016.1223180

Garrett, S. (2017). A comparative study between Teachers' self-efficacy of differentiated instruction and frequency differentiated instruction is implemented . Doctoral dissertation. Scottsdale, AZ: Northcentral University.

Ginja, T. G., and Chen, X. (2020). Teacher Educators' perspectives and experiences towards differentiated instruction. Int. J. Instr. 13, 781–798. doi: 10.29333/iji.2020.13448a

Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., Bailes, L. P., and Nichols, R. (2019). From school leadership to differentiated instruction: a pathway to student learning in schools. Elem. Sch. J. 120, 197–219. doi: 10.1086/705827

Goddard, Y., and Kim, M. (2018). Examining connections between teacher perceptions of collaboration, differentiated instruction, and teacher efficacy. Teach. Coll. Rec. 120, 1–24. doi: 10.1177/016146811812000102

Graham, L. J., De Bruin, K., Lassig, C., and Spandagou, I. (2021). A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation: investigating conceptualization, characteristics, and methods used. Review Educ. 9, 161–198. doi: 10.1002/rev3.3238

Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K., and Vantieghem, W. (2021). Toward more inclusive education: an empirical test of the universal design for learning conceptual model among preservice teachers. J. Teach. Educ. 72, 381–395. doi: 10.1177/0022487120965525

Hall, T. (2002). Differentiated instruction: effective classroom practices report. NCAC 10, 535–554. doi: 10.4236/ce.2019.103039

Hattie, J. (2005). The paradox of reducing class size and improving learning outcomes. Int. J. Educ. Res. 43, 387–425. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2006.07.002

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement . London and New York: Routledge.

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning . London, UK: Routledge.

He, Y., and Levin, B. B. (2008). Match or mismatch? How congruent are the beliefs of teacher candidates, cooperating teachers, and university-based teacher educators? Teach. Educ. Q. 35, 37–55.

Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118

Hung, Y.-J., and Chao, S.-M. (2021). Practicing tiered and heterogeneous grouping tasks in differentiated EFL classrooms at a military institution in Taiwan. Asia Pac. J. Educ. 41, 405–423. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2020.1859989

Jiacheng, L., and Jing, C. (2013). Banzhuren and classrooming: democracy in the Chinese classroom. Int. J. Progress. Educ. 9, 91–106.

Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 141–151. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000116

Kim, H.-Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restor. Dent. Endodont. 38, 52–54. doi: 10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52

Lam, C. C., Ho, E. S. C., and Wong, N. Y. (2002). Parents’ beliefs and practices in education in Confucian heritage cultures: the Hong Kong case. J. Southeast Asian Educ. 3, 99–114. doi: 10.1002/berj.3248

Lambert, L. T. (1999). Standards-based assessment of student learning: A comprehensive approach . Reston, VA: NASPE Publications.

Lavania, M., and Nor, F. M. (2021). Factors influencing the implementation of differentiated instruction in English language instruction in rural and urban secondary schools of Johor Bahru. Creat. Educ. 12, 1235–1246. doi: 10.4236/ce.2021.126093

Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: inclusive strategies for standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. Am. Second. Educ. 32, 34–62.

Letzel, V. (2019). Teachers' use of DI–exploring predictors of teachers’ use of differentiated instruction within the region of Trier (Germany) in Junior researchers of EARLI conference. Germany: Aachen.

Letzel, V., Pozas, M., and Schneider, C. (2020). ‘It’s all about the attitudes!’–introducing a scale to assess teachers’ attitudes towards the practice of differentiated instruction. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 15:2402. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2020.1862402

Liu, L., Jones, P. E., and Sadera, W. A. (2010). An investigation on experienced teachers’ knowledge and perceptions of instructional theories and practices. Comput. Sch. 27, 20–34. doi: 10.1080/07380560903536256

Lynott, D.-J., and Woolfolk, A. E. (1994). Teachers' implicit theories of intelligence and their educational goals. J. Res. Dev. Educ. 27, 253–264.

Malinen, O.-P., Savolainen, H., and Xu, J. (2012). Beijing in-service teachers' self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive education. Teach. Teach. Educ. 28, 526–534. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.004

McMillan, A. (2011). The relationship between professional learning and middle school teachers' knowledge and use of differentiated instruction . Doctoral dissertation. Minneapolis, MN: Walden University.

Merawi, T. M. (2018). Primary school teachers’ perceptions of differentiated instruction (DI) in Awi administrative zone, Ethiopia. Bahir Dar. J. Educ. 9:5552. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2105552

Moosa, V., and Shareefa, M. (2019). The impact of teachers’ experience and qualification on efficacy, knowledge and implementation of differentiated instruction. Int. J. Instr. 12, 587–604. doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12237a

Nowell, L. (1992). Rethinking the classroom: A Community of Inquiry . East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teach Learning.

OECD (2021). Education at a glance 2021: OECD indicators . Paris: OECD Publishing, doi: 10.1787/b35a14e5-en

Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS . London, UK: Routledge.

Parsons, S. A. (2008). Case studies of four teachers: The openness of the tasks they implement, the adaptations they make, and the rationales they offer for adapting . Greensboro: The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.

Perry, T., Steele, C., and Hilliard, A. III (2004). Young, gifted, and black: Promoting high achievement among African American students . Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Pozas, M., Jaquelina González, T. C., and Letzel, V. (2021). A change of perspective–exploring Mexican primary and secondary school students’ perceptions of their teachers differentiated instructional practice. J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 21, 222–232. doi: 10.1111/1471-3802.12514

Raosoft, I. (2004). Raosoft sample size calculator. Seattle: Raosoft, Inc., Available at: http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html

Roy, A., Guay, F., and Valois, P. (2013). Teaching to address diverse learning needs: development and validation of a differentiated instruction scale. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 17, 1186–1204. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2012.743604

Sheehan, J. A. (2011). Responding to student needs: The impact on classroom practice of teacher perceptions of differentiated instruction . Doctoral dissertation. Minneapolis, MN: Capella University.

Shi, Y., and Hua, G. (2007). 差异教学与教育剬平 [differentiated instruction and educational equity]. 教育研究 1, 36–40.

Sibanda, S. (2021). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of differentiated instruction in the foundation phase in a Tshwane south district school . Doctoral dissertation. Muckleneuk, Pretoria: University of South Africa.

Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika 74, 107–120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0

Smale-Jacobse, A. E., Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M., and Maulana, R. (2019). Differentiated instruction in secondary education: a systematic review of research evidence. Front. Psychol. 10:2366. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366

Suprayogi, M. N., Valcke, M., and Godwin, R. (2017). Teachers and their implementation of differentiated instruction in the classroom. Teach. Teach. Educ. 67, 291–301. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.020

Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., and Ullman, J. B. (2013). Using multivariate statistics . Boston, MA: Pearson.

Tieso, C. (2005). The effects of grouping practices and curricular adjustments on achievement. J. Educ. Gift. 29, 60–89. doi: 10.1177/016235320502900104

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Mapping a route toward differentiated instruction. Educ. Leadersh. 57, 12–17.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., et al. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: a review of literature. J. Educ. Gift. 27, 119–145. doi: 10.1177/016235320302700203

Tomlinson, C. A., and Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A., and Moon, T. (2014). Assessment in a differentiated classroom. Proven programs in education: Classroom management and assessment 1–5. doi: 10.4135/9781483365633.n1

Tulbure, C. (2011). Differentiated instruction for pre-service teachers: an experimental investigation. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 30, 448–452. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.088

Unesco, A. (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education . France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Xuemei Feng, A., Brown, E., Bracken, B., Stambaugh, T., French, H., et al. (2008). A study of differentiated instructional change over 3 years. Gifted Child Q. 52, 297–312. doi: 10.1177/0016986208321809

Wan, S. W.-Y. (2016). Differentiated instruction: are Hong Kong in-service teachers ready? Teachers Teach. 23, 1–28. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2016.1204289

Wertheim, C., and Leyser, Y. (2002). Efficacy beliefs, background variables, and differentiated instruction of Israeli prospective teachers. J. Educ. Res. 96, 54–63. doi: 10.1080/00220670209598791

Whitburn, J. (2001). Effective classroom organization in primary schools: mathematics. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 27, 411–428. doi: 10.1080/03054980125200

Whitley, J., Gooderham, S., Duquette, C., Orders, S., and Cousins, J. B. (2019). Implementing differentiated instruction: a mixed-methods exploration of teacher beliefs and practices. Teachers Teach. 25, 1043–1061. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2019.1699782

Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational psychology . The Ohio State University: Pearson Education International.

Wu, E. H. (2017). Paving the way for differentiated instruction in rural classrooms under common core state standards: an interview with Carolyn Callahan. J. Adv. Acad. 28, 51–65. doi: 10.1177/1932202X16683646

Yan, X., and Hua, G. (2020). 差异教学课堂模式的理论建构与实践探索 [theoretical constructs and practical explorations of differentiated classroom model]. 教育理论与实践 40, 3–6.

Yang, J., Huang, X., and Liu, X. (2014). An analysis of education inequality in China. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 37, 2–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2014.03.002

Yuen, S. Y., Leung, C. C. Y., and Wan, S. W.-Y. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions and practices of differentiated instruction: Cross-cultural validation of the differentiated instruction questionnaire in Hong Kong. Int. J. Educ. Res. 115:102044. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102044

Keywords: differentiated instruction, teachers’ practice, psychometric properties, DI-Quest instrument, Chinese secondary schools

Citation: Bi M, Struyven K and Zhu C (2023) Variables that influence teachers’ practice of differentiated instruction in Chinese classrooms: A study from teachers’ perspectives. Front. Psychol . 14:1124259. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1124259

Received: 14 December 2022; Accepted: 10 February 2023; Published: 06 March 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Bi, Struyven and Zhu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Meijie Bi, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Differentiated Instruction, Perceptions and Practices

First Online: 27 February 2021

Cite this chapter

differentiated instruction research studies

Ainur Aliyeva 3

329 Accesses

In a time of shifting paradigms from teacher-centered approaches toward more student-centered approaches, differentiated instruction has become one of the leading pedagogical strategies to address individual learning needs

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Exploring How Teachers’ Personal Characteristics, Teaching Behaviors and Contextual Factors Are Related to Differentiated Instruction in the Classroom: A Cross-National Perspective

Differentiated instruction as an approach to establish effective teaching in inclusive classrooms.

Models of Teaching

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2013). Introduction to research in education . Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Google Scholar

Baker, L. (2006). Observation: A complex research method. Library Trends, 55 (1), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2006.0045 .

Article Google Scholar

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9 (2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 .

Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2013). A step-by-step guide to personalize learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 40 (7), 12–19.

Corley, M. A. (2005). Differentiated instruction: Adjusting to the needs of all learners. Focus on basics. Connecting Research and Practice, 7 (C), 13–15. Retrieved from http://www.ncsall.net/?id=736 .

Coubergs, C., Struyven, K., Vanthournout, G., & Engels, N. (2017). Measuring teachers’ perceptions about differentiated instruction: The DI-Quest instrument and model. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.02.004 .

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Cronin, C. (2014). Using case study research as a rigorous form of inquiry. Nurse Researcher, 21 (5), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.21.5.19.e1240 .

De Neve, D., Devos, G., & Tuytens, M. (2015). The importance of job resources and self-efficacy for beginning teachers’ professional learning in differentiated instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.003 .

Flem, A., Moen, T., & Gudmundsdottir, S. (2004). Towards inclusive schools: A study of inclusive education in practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10885625032000167160 .

Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Hale, J. B., Chen, S. A., Tan, S. C., Poon, K., Fitzer, K. R., & Boyd, L. A. (2016). Reconciling individual differences with collective needs: The juxtaposition of sociopolitical and neuroscience perspectives on remediation and compensation of student skill deficits. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5 (2), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2016.04.001 .

Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8 (4), 337–347.

Huebner, T. A. (2010). What research says about… / differentiated learning , reimagining school (pp. 83–84). Alexandria, Virginia US: ASCD.

Kazakhstan. (2007). Law on Education . (2007). Retrieved from https://online.zakon.kz/document/?doc_id=30118747#pos=120;-69 .

Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership redefined: An evocative context for teacher leadership. School Leadership & Management, 23 (4), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/1363243032000150953 .

Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. New York and London: The Guilford Press.

Mac Ruairc, G., Ottesen, E., & Precey, R. (2013). Leadership for inclusive education . Rotterdam, NL: Sense Publishers.

Book Google Scholar

Makoelle, T. M. (2016). Inclusive teaching in South Africa . Cape Town: Sun Media Publishers.

Makoelle, T. M. (2020). Schools’ transition toward inclusive education in Post-Soviet countries: Selected cases in Kazakhstan, Sage Open , 10 (2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020926586 .

McTighe, J., & Brown, J. L. (2005). Differentiated instruction and educational standards: Is etente possible? Theory into Practice, 44 (3), 234–244. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_8 .

Meyer, O. (2010). Introducing the CLIL-pyramid: Key strategies and principles for quality CLIL planning and teaching. Basic Issues in EFL—Teaching and Learning , 11–29.

Mills, M., Monk, S., Keddie, A., Renshaw, P., Christie, P., Geelan, D., et al. (2014). Differentiated learning: From policy to classroom. Oxford Review of Education, 40 (3), 331–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.911725 .

Nicolae, M. (2014). Teachers’ beliefs as the differentiated instruction starting point: Research basis. Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128 , 426–431. / https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.182 .

Norwich, B. (1994). Differentiation: From the perspective of resolving tensions between basic social values and assumptions about individual differences. Curriculum Studies, 2 (3), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965975940020302 .

Precey, R. (2011). Inclusive leadership for inclusive education—The Utopia worth working towards. Contemporary Management Quarterly/Wspólczesne Zarzadzanie , 2 .

Raskala, J. (2014). Differentiation in CLIL: Methods and challenges. Bachelor dissertation University of Jyvaskyla. Retrieved 30 January 2017, from http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-201504221648 .

Reeves, D. B. (2009). Leading change in your school: How to conquer myths, build commitment, and get results . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Roiha, A. S. (2014). Teachers’ views on differentiation in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Perceptions, practices and challenges. Language and Education, 28 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2012.748061 .

Santamaría, L. J. (2014). Critical change for the greater good: Multicultural perceptions in educational leadership toward social justice and equity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50 (3), 347–391.

Shields, C. M. (2010). Transformative leadership: Working for equity in diverse contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46 (4), 558–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X10375609 .

Smit, R., & Humpert, W. (2012). Differentiated instruction in small schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28 (8), 1152–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.003 .

Stanford, B., & Reeves, S. (2009). Making it happen: Using differentiated instruction, retrofit framework and universal design for learning. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus 5 (6), 3–7. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ967757.pdf .

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7 (7), 935–947. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ854351.pdf .

Suprayogi, M. N., Valcke, M., & Godwin, R. (2017). Teachers and their implementation of differentiated instruction in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.020 .

Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable differences? Standards-based Teaching and Differentiation, 58 (1), 6–11.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2016). Why differentiation is difficult: Reflections from years in the trenches. Australian Educational Leader, 38 (3), 6.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom . Alexandria, Virginia US: ASCD.

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connecting content and kids . Alexandria, US: ASCD.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). What is backward design? Understanding by design (pp. 13–34). Alexandria, Virginia US: ASCD.

Zainal, Z. (2007). Case study as a research method. Jurnal Kemanusiaan , (9), 1–6. Retrieved from http://psyking.net/htmlobj-3837/case_study_as_a_research_method.pdf .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan

Ainur Aliyeva

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ainur Aliyeva .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan

Tsediso Michael Makoelle

Michelle Somerton

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Aliyeva, A. (2021). Differentiated Instruction, Perceptions and Practices. In: Makoelle, T.M., Somerton, M. (eds) Inclusive Education in a Post-Soviet Context. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65543-3_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65543-3_4

Published : 27 February 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-65542-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-65543-3

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings
My Bibliography
Collections
Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education: A Systematic Review of Research Evidence

Affiliation.

1 Department of Teacher Education, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
PMID: 31824362
PMCID: PMC6883934
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366

Differentiated instruction is a pedagogical-didactical approach that provides teachers with a starting point for meeting students' diverse learning needs. Although differentiated instruction has gained a lot of attention in practice and research, not much is known about the status of the empirical evidence and its benefits for enhancing student achievement in secondary education. The current review sets out to provide an overview of the theoretical conceptualizations of differentiated instruction as well as prior findings on its effectiveness. Then, by means of a systematic review of the literature from 2006 to 2016, empirical evidence on the effects of within-class differentiated instruction for secondary school students' academic achievement is evaluated and summarized. After a rigorous search and selection process, only 14 papers about 12 unique empirical studies on the topic were selected for review. A narrative description of the selected papers shows that differentiated instruction has been operationalized in many different ways. The selection includes studies on generic teacher trainings for differentiated instruction, ability grouping and tiering, individualization, mastery learning, heterogeneous grouping, and remediation in flipped classroom lessons. The majority of the studies show small to moderate positive effects of differentiated instruction on student achievement. Summarized effect sizes across studies range from d = +0.741 to +0.509 (omitting an outlier). These empirical findings give some indication of the possible benefits of differentiated instruction. However, they also point out that there are still severe knowledge gaps. More research is needed before drawing convincing conclusions regarding the effectiveness and value of different approaches to differentiated instruction for secondary school classes.

Keywords: ability grouping; adaptive teaching; differentiated instruction; differentiation; effectiveness; review; secondary education; student performance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

Europe PubMed Central
Frontiers Media SA
PubMed Central

Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
v.10(10); 2023 Oct
PMC10495708

Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on learning outcomes and learning satisfaction in the evidence‐based nursing course: Empirical research quantitative

Shwu‐ru liou.

1 Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Puzi, Chiayi Taiwan

2 Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Chiayi Branch, Puzi, Chiayi Taiwan

Ching‐Yu Cheng

Tsui‐ping chu, chia‐hao chang, hsiu‐chen liu, associated data.

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in Mendeley Data at http://doi.org/10.17632/7fmswnmyft.1 .

Diversified students in higher education and the complexity and difficulty of the evidence‐based nursing course perceived by students challenge nursing educators. Differentiated instruction can provide students with various opportunities to learn and meet the learning needs of students with different academic abilities and strengths, which may be a solution. This study aimed to apply differentiated instruction to design the undergraduate evidence‐based nursing course and evaluate the effects of differentiated instruction on students' learning outcomes and learning satisfaction.

One‐group pretest–posttest pre‐experimental design was applied.

Ninety‐eight undergraduate nursing students enrolled in the evidence‐based nursing course 2020 participated in this study. Students' learning outcomes including preferred learning styles, classroom engagement, collaborative learning, attitudes towards evidence‐based nursing, learning satisfaction and evidence‐based nursing knowledge were measured using validated questionnaires.

The differentiated instruction increased students' learning interests, promoted focused and independent thinking, and enhanced academic achievement. Students' classroom engagement, attitudes towards evidence‐based nursing, evidence‐based nursing knowledge and learning satisfaction were improved after the course. The course designed with differentiated instruction provided a supportive learning environment and furnished a vivid pedagogical way for the unique nursing profession.

Patient or Public Contribution

Positive results of the study support the application of differentiated instruction in the evidence‐based nursing course. The study indicates that the application of differentiated instruction in mixed‐ability classrooms in the evidence‐based nursing course improved students' learning outcomes, attitudes towards evidence‐based nursing, evidence‐based nursing knowledge and learning satisfaction. In clinical settings where nurses are even more diverse in academic education, clinical experiences and learning preferences, differentiated instruction can be a suitable application for in‐service training and education to promote nurses' enthusiasm for professional learning.

1. INTRODUCTION

The importance of educating healthcare professionals with competency in providing evidence‐based practice (EBP) to enhance quality and safety care has been declared. The American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition program stresses hospitals to prepare their nurses with the ability to apply EBP to ensure exemplary professional practice (Nelson‐Brantley et al., 2020 ). The evidence‐based nursing (EBN) bridges the gap between research and practice by looking at the quality of research methods and findings that help nursing professionals make appropriate and effective decisions for clinical practice. Nursing students, who are future nursing professionals, are naturally expected to have competency in applying the best available evidence and be prepared with the ability of EBP before graduation (American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN], 2021 ).

With the increasing emphasis on EBN, nurse educators face two major issues. One is that nursing students regard the EBN course as complicated and difficult for them to understand or apply the knowledge and skills in clinical settings (Tlili et al., 2022 ). The other is the challenge that students are more diversified in higher education due to their varied educational and life experiences (Trolian & Parker III, 2022 ). Because of the diversified characteristics, students demonstrate varying learning abilities, learning styles and academic levels in classrooms (Ramdani et al., 2021 ). Tomlinson ( 2001 ) asserts that students learn best when their teachers accommodate the differences in their readiness levels, interests and learning profiles. Unfortunately, traditional and undifferentiated instruction that does not assist knowledge construction for students with various learning capacities causes problems of inequality and inequity in education (Tomlinson, 2001 ).

Student‐centred pedagogies, which place learners at the centre of the learning process, can meet learners' individual learning needs and styles and engage them in the process of learning (An & Mindrila, 2020 ). Examples of student‐centred pedagogies include active learning, which involves students in their own learning process (Nguyen et al., 2021 ); collaborative learning, which engages students working together towards the attainment of goals (Lumatauw et al., 2020 ); and problem‐based learning, which provides a learning environment for learners to actively collaborate with others and develop problem‐solving skills (Trullàs et al., 2022 ). These student‐centred pedagogies focus more on the process of learning during class time. Differentiated instruction is another student‐centred approach (Gheyssens et al., 2020 ) that emphasizes flexibility in the areas of content, process and product to provide more opportunities for students to choose appropriate content and access to content, learning activities that showcase their individual strengths, and methods that are suitable for them to demonstrate their learning outcomes (Tomlinson, 2000 ).

The Hallmarks of Excellence in nursing education proposed by the National League for Nursing (NLN) provides nursing faculties a guide to design and evaluate their education programme. One of the hallmarks emphasizes that teaching/learning strategies should meet the learning needs of a diverse student population (NLN, 2020 ). Differentiated instruction is teaching strategies that address the diverse learning needs of students (Tomlinson, 2001 ). These teaching strategies can meet the learning needs of students with different academic abilities and strengths and give various opportunities for students to learn (Boelens et al., 2018 ; Tomlinson, 2001 ). Differentiated instruction has been broadly applied in elementary and high schools internationally, yet, very little evidence is reported in higher education (Turner et al., 2017 ). Nevertheless, differentiated instruction is supposed to be demanded more in higher education since student populations in higher education systems are more culturally, socially and academically diverse (Boelens et al., 2018 ).

To the best of our knowledge, there is currently no research empirically testing the effectiveness of applying differentiated instruction in nursing students' learning outcomes in an EBN course. Because of the importance of possessing competency in EBN and the diverse student characteristics, the purpose of this study was to apply differentiated instruction in designing the EBN course to increase undergraduate nursing students' learning interests in and better understanding of the EBN. The study also examined the effects of differentiated instruction on students' learning outcomes and learning satisfaction. Two research questions were set to guide the study:

What are the effects of differentiated instruction on students' preferred learning styles?
What are the effects of differentiated instruction on the degree of students' classroom engagement, collaborative learning, attitudes towards EBN, learning satisfaction and EBN knowledge?

2. BACKGROUND

2.1. theoretical background of differentiated instruction.

According to differentiated instruction, teachers proactively remodel curricula, teaching methods, resources, learning activities and student products to offer a range of learning opportunities that cater to students' individual learning abilities (Tomlinson, 2001 ). Differentiated instruction can be closely associated with several adult learning theories, including Humanism, Self‐Determination Theory, Sociocultural Constructivism and Multiple Intelligences. Humanism places the learner at the centre and emphasizes self‐actualization. It suggests that learning is self‐directed, and adults are capable of taking responsibility for their own learning (Mukhalalati & Taylor, 2019 ). Self‐Determination Theory gives students the responsibility to make choices about their learning, leading to increased motivation and a sense of control in the learning process (Alrabia, 2021 ). Sociocultural Constructivism proposes that individuals construct new knowledge based on their existing skills and knowledge. Learning occurs through active social interactions with peers, teachers and engagement in social activities (Mukhalalati & Taylor, 2019 ). Multiple Intelligences asserts that individuals possess different types of intelligence, and effective learning occurs when instruction is tailored to an individual's strengths and preferences in relation to a specific task (Magableh & Abdullah, 2020 ).

Differentiated instruction aligns with these theories in several ways. Firstly, it empowers students to have control over their learning and cater to their individual needs and preferences. Secondly, it promotes collaborative learning and knowledge construction by creating opportunities for students to engage in meaningful interactions with others. Thirdly, it recognizes and accommodates the diverse strengths and preferences of students, enabling them to engage with content in ways that align with their unique intelligence. These adult learning theories share common characteristics with differentiated instruction, as they emphasize learner‐centredness, autonomy, active engagement and the recognition of individual differences.

2.2. Effects of differentiated instruction

The combing use of differentiated instruction and student‐centred teaching strategies provides opportunities for students to transform their learning behaviour (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ). Studies applying differentiated instruction in mixed‐ability classrooms revealed that students significantly and positively improved their learning achievements (Hapsari & Dahlan, 2018 ).

Although differentiated instruction is proposed to be useful at all levels of education, not many empirical studies reported its application in higher education (Boelens et al., 2018 ). Published studies that applied differentiated instruction among non‐nursing students reported that students enhanced their learning interests (Sapan & Mede, 2022 ), developed independence and autonomy towards their learning (Chen & Chen, 2018 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ), grew positive attitudes towards the course (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ) and were satisfied with the classes and course design (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). Some studies also reported that differentiated instruction significantly improved students' academic performance (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ) and achievement (Chen & Chen, 2018 ), increased students' cooperation, interaction, classroom engagement (Sapan & Mede, 2022 ), active learning (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ) and learning motivation (Chen & Chen, 2018 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). Educators using differentiated instruction combined with student‐centred learning strategies found positive outcomes of students' successful learning skills and experiences, classroom engagement, learning interests or social interaction (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ).

2.3. Definition of differentiated instruction

Differentiated instruction was first proposed as a teaching practice by Tomlinson in response to the extensive scope of student discrepancies in mixed‐ability classrooms. Tomlinson ( 2000 ) defines differentiated instruction plainly as tailoring instruction to meet students' needs. When teachers vary their teaching in order to fit individuals or small groups for the best experience, they are differentiating.

2.4. Description of the differentiated instruction

Differentiated instruction contains three sections: content and access to content, process and product. It emphasizes a flexible course design that allows curricula for differences in content, process and product sections to provide learners with the excellence of learning and satisfy their unique learning needs (Tomlinson, 2001 ).

2.4.1. First section: Content and access to content

The content refers to topics, concepts or themes. The differentiating content includes what students are to learn and how students access the material taught. It involves providing students with various resources and choices that match their readiness, interests and learning profiles to select and access the materials taught (Tomlinson, 2000 ).

Several ways are proposed for differentiating content. Teachers may use flexible grouping where students can work in small groups or alone to reinforce content; highlight or summarize key portions of content with illustrations or colours; present material in visual, auditory or kinaesthetic ways; provide lecture videotapes; use books, pictures or Internet as a means of developing understanding and knowledge of the topic or concept; use examples that relate to students' experiences or knowledge to practice situations or explain contents (Tomlinson, 2001 ).

2.4.2. Second section: Process

The process refers to how students make sense or understand and assimilate the information, concepts or skills. The differentiating process involves applying varying activities and techniques which can provide more opportunities for students to learn best and display individual strengths (Tomlinson, 2001 ). It concerns not only how teachers teach but also involves strategies that teachers encourage students to use to facilitate exploring the content taught. This can be done by tiering the course content and activities that can make students learn step by step; providing guidelines for every step of learning; using differentiated tactics to increase student interaction, engagement, higher order thinking and critical thinking during class time (Tomlinson, 2000 , 2001 ).

In addition, educators emphasized that differentiated instruction places students in the centre, provides opportunities for higher order thinking and group collaboration to solve problems, and changes students from passive acquisition of knowledge to an active learning process through student‐centred teachings such as teamwork learning, problem‐based learning or project‐based learning (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ). Therefore, in the spirit of this phase, combining the use of student‐centred teaching methods to design classroom activities for the EBN course was considered.

2.4.3. Third section: Product

The differentiating product involves providing various choices of evaluations that permit students to express how much they comprehend and how well they are able to administer their knowledge and skills learned from the content (Tomlinson, 2000 ). The traits of successfully differentiated products contain providing evident and proper guides for success, focusing on real‐world application, advancing creative and critical thinking, requiring analysis or synthesis of information, permitting diverse methods of expression and providing opportunities for peer and self‐evaluation (Tomlinson, 2001 ).

To differentiate product, teachers can encourage students to express what they have learned in varied ways, offer opportunities for student‐derived topics for projects; allow for varied working arrangements—alone or with a group; provide clear guidelines for independent work that matches individual needs; and use a wide variety of assessments or assignments for students (Tomlinson, 2001 ).

3.1. Study design

This study used a one‐group pretest–posttest design to evaluate students' learning outcomes after the implementation of teaching/learning activities designed based on differentiated instruction. The one‐group pretest–posttest design is proposed to be useful for discovering the effectiveness of an intervention in a homogeneous group (Norwood, 2000 ). The research design, therefore, is suitable for this study because participants in the study were nursing students in the same age group and university.

3.2. Participants and setting

The participants were students in a 2‐year Registered Nurse‐to‐Bachelor of Science nursing programme who enrolled in the EBN course at the primary investigator's serving university in southern Taiwan in 2020. All students that enrolled in the EBN course taught by the researcher (a total of 100 students) were invited to participate in this study. Of them, 98 students completed and returned both the pre‐ and post‐test questionnaires with a response rate of 98%.

According to the concept of patient and public engagement and involvement (PPEI), the researched population is actively involved in the research design, is informed of research information and knowledge and participates in the research. The insights provided by these participants contribute to the research design and enhance the researcher's understanding of the condition under investigation.

In this study, although students were not directly involved in the course design, feedback from previous students who had taken the course was taken into consideration during the course design process. Students had the power to choose their preferred methods of learning under the guidance of the instructor. They had the freedom to select their learning mediums and materials, form groups for collaboration, explore research topics and articles of interest and determine their preferred modes of presentation. Moreover, students shared their discussion results throughout the course, presented their final work in class and participated in evaluating both their own and their peers' final presentations.

3.3. Development of the EBN course based on the differentiated instruction

3.3.1. course description.

The EBN course was a required, 2‐credit h undergraduate course for nursing students. The course was designed mainly based on the five steps of EBN: (1) asking an answerable clinical question, (2) acquiring the best evidence, (3) appraising the evidence, (4) applying the evidence and (5) auditing or evaluating the outcomes of the practice (Melnyk & Fineout‐Overholt, 2019 ). Since nursing students are not currently clinical nurses, the course focused more on the first three steps. The semester lasted 18 weeks. Excluding introduction, holiday, exam and project report weeks, seven programme units in 11 weeks were designed for the course. Table 1 presents the course objectives and teaching strategies derived from differentiated instruction.

Course objectives, sections of differentiated instruction and teaching strategies designed in the study.

Overall goal: Nursing students will be able to search health‐related literature with empirical findings based on their answerable questions or topics of interest. Students will also be able to assess the quality of evidence from the studies.
Week	Unit topic	Unit objectives	Strategies designed in the study	Section
1	Introduction to EBN	1. Understand the definition of EBN 2. Understand the importance of EBN 3. Understand the steps of EBN	1. Teaching aids development: ‐Non‐electronic materials: Books, supplemental articles in English and Chinese, reading and assignment guidelines ‐Electronic materials: Videos with PowerPoint slides embedded with highlighted key portions of content and vivid illustrations, colours or graphs ‐Case scenarios related to EBN steps 2. Materials uploaded onto the school's electronic platform	Content and access to content
2 and 3	Asking PICO questions	1. Understand the main concepts in the unit: foreground/background problem, PICO and types of PICO questions 2. Understand how to ask a PICO question 3. Establish a topic for EBN and ask a PICO question based on scenarios.	1. Flexible grouping: Students decide on group size (alone, in pairs or in small or large groups) for all classroom activities. 2. Flexible class time proportion: based on unit topic and instructional instruction. 3. Literature search: A 2‐h laboratory session guided by the school librarian. 4. Flexible topic and article selection: Students select the article to read from searched literature based on their own interests. 5. Hands‐on practice: students demonstrate their abilities in accessing electronic databases and searching for publications. 6. Guided reading: Students are guided to read research articles based on the unit. 7. Literature circle: Students read and answer the guiding questions based on their selected article, and decide the way to share in class. 8. Learning sheets: Contain different question types and vivid illustrations in a variety of styles for each unit. 9. Independent study: Allow students to work with whomever they felt comfortable. 10. Clinical expert speeches: sharing the role and application of the EBN in clinical.	Process
4 and 5	Acquiring the best evidence	1. Understand the types of PICO questions. 2. Understand the 6S Pyramid. 3. Understand the search strategy for the best evidence. 4. Understand the PRISMA flow diagram. 5. Search evidence based on the scenario and PICO question.
6	Research design and level of evidence	1. Understand the levels of evidence pyramid. 2. Understand types of research designs. 3. Understand study types and biases. 4. Identify the research design and level of evidence of the selected research articles.
7–9	Appraising critically the quality of healthcare‐related research	1. Understand tools for appraising different study designs. 2. Understand critical appraisal principles of quantitative studies. 3. Critically appraise the study design of the selected research articles.
10 and 11	Speech: Evidence translation and clinical nursing practice	1. Understand the importance of applying evidence‐based knowledge to practice. 2. Understand the process of transferring evidence into practice.
10 and 11	Speech: Trans‐disciplinary EBP and quality of patient care	1. Understand the concept of transdisciplinary care. 2. Understand the importance of transdisciplinary care for quality patient care.
12	Final examination	Evaluate students' knowledge and skills gained from the course.	1. Allow flexible grouping for all evaluations. 2. Research article reading test using the article selected by students themselves. 3. Complete a mini‐project using the guideline and appraisal tool. 4. Self‐determine the topic of interest for the project. 5. Present the mini‐project publicly in ways preferred. 6. Both the instructor and all students evaluate all presentations.	Product
13 and 14	Project report			Product

The overall learning objectives of the course were first established and proposed for students. Each unit also had unit objectives that guided students to learn from that unit. The overall goal of the course was that nursing students learned how to search health‐related literature with empirical findings based on their answerable questions or topics of interest and assess the quality of evidence from the studies. A pre‐assessment to assist the understanding of individuals' readiness, interests and learning styles was provided to students before the class began.

3.3.2. Strategies for differentiated instruction

According to differentiated instruction, after understanding how students learn best, a course can be developed with differentiating content and access to content, differentiating process and differentiating product. Information from the pre‐assessment guided the instructor to appropriately differentiate the content, process and product of the EBN course throughout the semester.

The first section differentiating content involves providing students with various learning resources and choices to select and access the materials taught (Tomlinson, 2000 ). To differentiate content and access to content, teaching aids were developed as electronic and non‐electronic materials. For non‐electronic materials, books, extra supplemental articles in English and Chinese and reading and assignment guidelines were prepared and used in response to varied learning levels of complexity. When developing textual materials, we highlighted key portions of content in PowerPoint slides for each unit and used vivid illustrations, colours or graphs to help students to understand more about the content and made the contents more attractive to students. Case scenarios related to EBN steps were developed as examples for students to practice and explain contents.

For electronic materials, videos with PowerPoint slides for each unit lecture were made. All these materials were uploaded onto the school's electronic platform for courses, the E‐Campus, to allow students to access and learn the subject in a self‐paced format. The design of these materials can make the conceptual abstraction of the content more concrete and practical to students, provide opportunities for independent study, help and stimulate students to stay focused and clarify the content. In addition, supplemental instruction outside of the scheduled class times was offered for individuals or groups to reinforce contents.

The second section differentiating process encompasses using diverse activities and techniques which can furnish more chances for students to learn best (Tomlinson, 2001 ). To differentiate the process, we first applied flexible grouping for all classroom activities. Students decided the size of the group, such as working alone, in pairs or in small or large groups. Flexible grouping was also applied to the term project, oral presentation and final exam. Arranging appropriate class time proportions for various instructional strategies was then planned based on the unit topic. Combining the use of differentiated instruction and student‐centred teaching strategies which were proposed by researchers to transform students from passive learners to active learners and promote students' learning interests were also administered (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ). In addition, 4 h of the class were arranged as independent study hours. Students could use the 4 h to work with whomever they felt comfortable.

The classroom activities designed for the EBN course included first, a 2‐h laboratory session for literature search was arranged. The school librarian was invited to guide students to use physical and online library resources. Students were asked to specify a topic of interest and turn in one searched research article based on the topic to demonstrate their ability to search for and access publications. Second, two clinical experts were invited to give speeches to share the role and application of the EBN in clinical to foster students' learning interests in EBN. Third, to provide information to the instructor and students about students' understanding of the core concepts and contents taught in the unit, learning sheets were developed and used at the end of each class. The items in the learning sheet were designed in various styles to meet the learning needs of students of varying levels. These item styles included single choice, multiple choice, fill‐in‐the‐blank, connecting the dots, short answer or essay questions that were helpful to cultivate students with different thinking abilities. These learning sheets were also designed with vivid illustrations to attract students' attention and interest.

Fourth, the literature circle activity was applied to help students integrate what they have learned in the module content with real hands‐on practice and to increase students' understanding of the content. The instructor first guided students to read the section in the selected research article in accordance with the course unit for that week. Using flexible grouping, students were then instructed to choose a research article they preferred, read the article and answer the guiding questions based on the chosen article. Finally, students decided on a way to share in class what they have discovered from the article.

The third section differentiating product involves providing various ways of evaluations for learners to exhibit their comprehension of the course and ability to apply the gained knowledge and skills learned from the content (Tomlinson, 2000 ). According to differentiated instruction, the teacher may combine tests with product options so that students have more opportunities to ponder, apply and display what they have learned from the content (Tomlinson, 2001 ). In the EBN course, project‐based learning with a presentation was designed to meet the general goal of the course so that students were able to evaluate the quality of evidence. Students were requested to finish a mini project by following a provided project guideline and a critical appraisal tool. Students were allowed to work on the project alone or in a group with two or more people. In addition, students decided on the topic of the project by themselves. At the end of the semester, students were asked to present their project publicly in ways they preferred. The class instructor and all students were responsible for the presentation evaluation. For the test, an academic article reading test was used. Students first decided to take it alone or in a group and the group size. They were allowed to find a health‐related research article in English or Chinese in accordance with their own interests before the test. Eight short answer questions were developed for students to answer based on the research article they selected. Two hours were scheduled for the test.

3.4. Outcome variables and measurements

Preferred learning style was measured by the Perceptual Learning‐Style Preference Questionnaire (PLSPQ) created by Reid ( 1987 , 1995 ). The PLSPQ consists of 30 items with six learning styles (five items for each learning style) including visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, tactile, individual and group learning. The scale is rated on a 5‐response Likert scale scoring from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Since individuals may utilize a combination of senses to optimize their learning outcomes while preferring one particular sensor mode, each learning style is categorized into major, minor or negligible (or negative) preference. Major means the learners' preferred learning style; minor indicates learners who do not prefer to learn in such a way but can still function using such learning method, whereas negligible means they may have difficulty learning in that way. The cut‐off points for each of these categories are as follows: 40 or above for major, 25–39 for minor and 24 or less for negligible. The reliability of the original scale was confirmed by the split‐half reliability. In the study, Cronbach's alpha for the six subscales of the PLSPQ were 0.73, 0.66, 0.71, 0.67, 0.89 and 0.89 for visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, tactile, individual and group learning respectively.

The Value of Teams (VT) developed by Levine et al. ( 2004 ) was used to measure students' value of collaborative learning. The VT consists of 17 items scored on a 5‐point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A higher score indicates greater agreement about the value of collaborative learning. The validity of the scale development study was confirmed by a factor analysis that showed two subscales: the value of group work and the value of working with peers. Cronbach's alphas for these two dimensions were 0.79 and 0.81 respectively (Levine et al., 2004 ). In this study, Cronbach's alpha was 0.85. Exploratory factor analysis showed that the VT explained 48.46% of the variation in the value of collaborative learning. The first factor (value of group work) explained 37.67% of the variation while the second factor (value of working with peers) added another 10.79%.

The Classroom Engagement Survey (CES) developed by O'Malley and colleagues (O'Malley et al., 2003 ) was used to measure students' level of classroom engagement. The CES is a 9‐item scale with Likert‐type response options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A higher score indicates a higher level of agreement in classroom engagement. Reliability (Cronbach's alpha was 0.84) and validity were confirmed by factor analysis in the original study. In this study, Cronbach's alpha was 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis showed that the CES as a single factor explained 41.35% of the variation in classroom engagement.

The short form of Individual Development and Educational Assessment (IDEA) developed and validated by the IDEA Center was used to evaluate students' satisfaction with the course learning. The scale, which contains 18 items and uses a 5‐point Likert scale (item score ranges from 1 to 5), has been utilized at a variety of universities in the USA with confirmed reliability and validity (Benton & Li, 2015 ). A higher score indicates a higher level of satisfaction with the designated course. In the study, Cronbach's alpha was 0.90. Parallel analysis resulted in two factors and exploratory factor analysis was done by requesting two factors. Results showed that the IDEA could explain 58.44% of the variation in learning satisfaction. The first factor (12 items), named knowledge and skills gained, explained 47.45% of the variation in learning satisfaction while the second factor (six items), named perceived course quality, added another 10.99%.

The 15‐item Attitudes Towards Evidence‐based Nursing scale (ATEN) was used to rate nursing students' attitudes towards EBN. The ATEN was developed by the researchers based on literature and rated on a 5‐response Likert scale scoring from 1(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In the study, Cronbach's alpha for the scale was 0.85. Parallel analysis resulted in two factors and exploratory factor analysis was done by requesting two factors. Results showed that the ATEN explained 54.83% of the variation in attitudes towards EBN. The first factor (nine items), named importance of EBN, explained 36.49% of the variation in attitudes towards EBN while the second factor (six items), named perceived competence in EBN, added another 18.34%.

The 16‐item Concept Inventory (CI) was developed by the research team to measure students' level of EBN knowledge and was used to assess students' academic performance. The CVI validity of the Concept Inventory was confirmed (CVI = 0.94) in this study.

A demographic sheet was used to understand individual characteristics such as age, grade level, learning experiences and achievement, and educational and career plans. Questions about the role of differentiated instruction in facilitating students' EBN learning were also asked.

3.5. Ethical considerations

We began to conduct the study after obtaining approval from an Institutional Review Board in Taiwan (REDACTED). In the first class, the course syllabus, the purpose and procedures of this study and participants' rights were verbally explained to the students. Participants were assured that they had the right not to fill out the questionnaires or answer any questions that they did not feel comfortable answering and that such a refusal would not influence their academic grades. All participants signed a consent form before data collection. Since the EBN course is a required course, all students in the course were required to participate in all designed activities.

3.6. Procedures

Before the class began, the EBN course syllabus that outlined course objectives, unit contents, classroom activities, project guidelines and methods of performance evaluation, supplementary reading articles, learning sheets, PowerPoint slides and lecture videos of the EBN course were all uploaded to the school's online learning platform, the E‐campus. Students who were willing to participate in the study received a packet containing a cover letter, a set of questionnaires and a set of multiple‐choice test questions at the beginning of the first and last class days. Students could choose to answer the questionnaires at any place they felt comfortable with and send the completed questionnaires back to the research assistant using the prepared envelope.

3.7. Statistical analysis

All data were entered and analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0. Demographic information was summarized using descriptive statistics. There are no missing values for measured variables. Before doing inferential statistics, all measured variables were tested for normality using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Results showed that except for learning style‐visual at the pretest and attitudes towards EBN at the pretest and posttest, all other variables were not normally distributed. Therefore, to test the effects of differentiated instruction, the Friedman test and Wilcoxon signed‐rank test were used to compare differences before and after the differentiated instruction on classroom engagement, collaborative learning, learning satisfaction, preferred learning styles and EBN knowledge. Paired t‐test was used to compare differences before and after the differentiated instruction on attitudes towards EBN. All tests were two‐sided and p ‐values of less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.

4.1. Descriptive results

The mean age of the participants was 20.81 (SD = 1.06) years and 94.9% were females. As shown in Table 2 , most students expressed that their academic performance was either fair or good at their previous college and current school, and considered their current academic performance improved. More than half of the students planned to obtain a bachelor's as their last academic degree and had a moderate or strong willingness to work as clinical nurses after graduation. Over 70% of the students expressed that they had a great sense or sense of academic accomplishment in the EBN course learning and agreed or strongly agreed that the differentiated instruction was worth applying to other courses.

Demographic information of the participants.

Variables
Performance at previous school
Poor	4	4.1
Fair	53	54.1
Good	34	34.7
Excellent	7	7.1
Performance at current school
Poor	1	1.0
Fair	64	65.3
Good	29	29.6
Excellent	4	4.1
Performance improvement at current school
Significant	14	14.3
Some improvement	69	70.4
About the same	15	15.3
Last academic degree plan to obtain
Bachelor	56	57.2
Master	41	41.8
Doctoral	1	1.0
Willingness to be a nurse after graduation
Strong	15	15.3
Medium	41	41.8
Fair	42	42.9
Weak	0	0
Learning experience in the EBN course gives me
Greatest accomplishment	22	22.5
A sense of accomplishment	50	51.0
Fair	21	21.4
No sense of accomplishment	4	4.1
Worst accomplishment	1	1.0
Differentiated instruction is worth applying to other courses
Strongly agree	27	27.6
Agree	56	57.1
Fair	14	14.3
Disagree	1	1.0
Strongly disagree	0	0

As shown in Table 3 , at posttest, students regarded differentiated instruction played an important role in facilitating their EBN learning, such as increasing learning interests, helping them to think independently and improving concentration on learning and learning aggressively. As a result, their acceptance of the EBN course augmented and they agreed that the EBN course was worth taking. The number of passive learners decreased while active learners increased. More students considered that the nurses with a bachelor's degree need to do EBN; this percentage was higher than the percentage of nurses with a master's or doctoral degree.

Differentiated instruction course design in facilitating students' learning.

Variables	Pretest		Posttest
Variables
EBN course design can increase my learning interests
Disagree	4	4.1	1	1.0
Neither agree nor disagree	36	36.7	18	18.4
Agree	58	59.2	79	80.6
EBN course design can help me think independently
Disagree	0	0	0	0
Neither agree nor disagree	22	22.4	9	9.2
Agree	76	77.6	89	90.8
EBN course design can help me concentrate on learning and learn aggressively
Disagree	0	0	1	1.0
Neither agree nor disagree	30	30.6	12	12.3
Agree	68	69.4	85	86.7
Level that I accept the EBN course
Low	0	0	2	2.0
Median	54	55.1	34	34.7
High	44	44.9	62	63.3
EBN course is worth taking
Disagree	0	0	2	2.0
Neither agree nor disagree	21	21.4	14	14.3
Agree	77	78.6	82	83.7
I prefer just following instructor's direction (passive learning)
Yes	70	71.4	64	65.3
No	28	28.6	34	34.7
I prefer to have more time and space to learn by myself and will seek teachers' help if needed (active learning)
Yes	72	73.5	83	84.7
No	26	26.5	15	15.3
Who needs to perform EBN (select all that apply)
Bachelor's degree nurses	74	75.5	77	78.6
Master's degree nurses	73	74.5	66	67.3
Doctoral degree nurses	65	66.3	53	54.2

4.2. Preferences of learning styles among nursing students

At the pretest, the percentage of students owning more than one major or preferred learning method was: 23.5% for two, 23.5% for three, 20.4% for four, 10.2% for five and 7.1% for six methods. Other 11.2% of the students had only one and 4.1% did not have any major or preferred learning methods. At posttest, the percentage changed to 18.4% for two, 24.5% for three, 30.6% for four, 9.2% for five and 9.2% for six methods. Other 5.1% of the students had only one and 3.1% did not have any major or preferred learning methods. The number of students who had unimodal or no major or preferred learning method decreased from pretest to posttest.

As shown in Table 4 , according to the mean cut‐off points stated by Reid ( 1995 ), at both pretest and posttest, the learning styles of kinaesthetic, tactile, and group fell into the major category of learning styles whereas the visual, auditory and individual learning styles fell into the minor category. At the pretest, the Friedman test showed that scores of visual and individual learning styles were lower than scores of the other learning styles (Chi‐square = 155.64, p < 0.001). At posttest, the score of the individual learning style was the lowest while the group learning style had a higher score than visual, auditory, kinaesthetic and individual learning (Chi‐square = 240.23, p < 0.001).

Students' preferred learning styles.

Variables	Pretest			Posttest
Variables
1. Visual		34.24	6.03		34.51	5.92
Major	20 (20.4)	43.10	2.79	22 (22.5)	41.82	2.30
Minor	74 (75.5)	32.51	3.66	69 (70.4)	33.54	3.31
Negligible	4 (4.1)	22.00	2.31	7 (7.1)	21.14	2.80
2. Auditory		39.24	4.95		39.10	6.22
Major	47 (48.0)	43.23	3.43	55 (56.1)	43.13	3.59
Minor	50 (51.0)	35.80	2.30	38 (38.8)	35.53	2.35
Negligible	1 (1.0)	24.00	0.00	5 (5.1)	22.00	2.00
3. Kinesthetic		40.49	4.31		41.12	5.22
Major	66 (67.3)	42.67	3.13	75 (76.5)	42.96	3.83
Minor	32 (32.7)	36.00	2.59	22 (22.5)	35.91	2.86
Negligible	0	—	—	1 (1.0)	18.00	0.00
4. Tactile		40.88	4.56		41.94	5.02
Major	69 (70.4)	42.96	3.46	77 (78.6)	43.53	3.97
Minor	29 (29.6)	35.93	2.65	20 (20.4)	36.90	1.77
Negligible	0	—	—	1 (1.0)	20.00	0.00
5. Individual		32.57	7.82		29.88	8.36
Major	22 (22.5)	43.36	3.87	17 (17.4)	43.29	3.80
Minor	54 (55.1)	32.22	3.92	50 (51.0)	30.92	3.57
Negligible	22 (22.4)	22.64	1.68	31 (31.6)	20.84	3.00
6. Group		40.88	6.06		42.65	5.35
Major	74 (75.5)	43.27	3.74	86 (87.8)	43.86	4.07
Minor	22 (22.5)	34.91	3.69	11 (11.2)	35.27	3.61
Negligible	2 (2.0)	18.00	0.00	1 (1.0)	20.00	0.00

Note : The cut‐off point for major: 40 or above, minor: 25–39 and negligible: 24 or less.

4.3. Effects of differentiated instruction on measured variables

As shown in Table 5 , the scores of group and tactile preferred learning styles increased significantly from pretest to posttest whereas the score of individual learning style decreased ( p < 0.05). The score for classroom engagement, collaborative learning, learning satisfaction and attitudes towards EBN and EBN knowledge increased significantly from pretest to posttest.

Effects of differentiated instruction on measured variables.

Variables	Pretest				Posttest				or
Variables	Range			Median	Range			Median	or
Preferred learning styles
Visual	20–48	34.24	6.03	34.00	16–48	34.51	5.92	36.00	−0.39	0.70
Auditory	24–50	39.24	4.95	38.00	20–50	39.10	6.22	40.00	−0.03	0.98
Kinesthetic	28–50	40.49	4.31	40.00	18–50	41.12	5.22	40.00	−1.57	0.12
Tactile	26–50	40.88	4.56	40.00	20–50	41.94	5.02	40.00	−2.33	0.02
Individual	20–50	32.57	7.82	32.00	12–50	29.88	8.36	30.00	−3.34	0.001
Group	18–50	40.88	6.06	40.00	20–50	42.65	5.35	40.00	−2.39	0.02
Classroom engagement	24–45	34.14	4.47	34.00	17–45	35.63	4.38	35.00	−3.53	<0.001
Collaborative learning	42–84	69.30	7.42	67.00	50–85	70.69	8.01	69.00	−2.16	0.03
Learning satisfaction	52–90	72.91	8.51	72.00	18–90	76.13	10.53	73.00	−3.19	0.001
Attitudes towards EBN	42–73	55.33	6.85	55.50	38–75	60.37	7.54	59.50	7.96	<0.001
EBN knowledge	0–75	42.86	13.82	43.75	31–100	71.36	14.80	68.75	−8.16	<0.001

Note : Paired t ‐test was used to compare scores of attitudes towards EBN, whereas Wilcoxon signed‐rank test was used to analyse all the rest variables at pretest and posttest.

5. DISCUSSION

The purposes of this study are to apply differentiated instruction for an EBN course presented to nursing students in Taiwan and test the effects of differentiated instruction on students' learning outcomes. Although not many studies reported the application of differentiated instruction in higher education, research findings from this study provided meaningful evidence for the contribution of differentiated instruction to undergraduate nursing students' learning in the EBN course. Generally, students demonstrated positive standpoints towards the role of differentiated instruction in facilitating their EBN course learning and gained substantial growth at the end of the semester. Most of the students said that they benefited from the EBN course designed with differentiated instruction and believed that the strategies employed in the three sections of differentiated instruction increased their learning interests, promoted their focused and independent thinking and gave them a sense of academic achievement. In addition, nursing students' acceptance of the EBN course was enhanced. The number of passive learners decreased while active learners increased.

The study's positive results support the use of differentiated instruction in the EBN course. These findings align with the principles of student‐centred pedagogies, emphasizing flexibility, choice, collaboration and active participation in the learning process, all of which are key traits of differentiated instruction (An & Mindrila, 2020 ). Moreover, the study's results are congruent with some adult learning theories such as Self‐Determination Theory (Alrabia, 2021 ) and Sociocultural Constructivism (Mukhalalati & Taylor, 2019 ) that emphasize student autonomy and motivation. Students take responsibility for their own learning and choose how they learn and knowledge is constructed collaboratively by collaborating with others.

Similar to the results of previous studies with non‐university students, differentiated instruction provides students with opportunities to choose learning methods that meet their learning styles and progress their learning at a pace suitable for their needs and abilities (Iqbal et al., 2020 ). When students are offered meaningful opportunities to select learning methods and demonstrate their abilities, strength, or talents, they relish learning more, become more self‐directed and turn into focused thinkers (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). All the benefits of differentiated learning lead students to positive outcomes including academic achievement, active learning, group interaction and cooperation, self‐confidence and satisfaction with the class (Chen & Chen, 2018 ; Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ; Gheyssens et al., 2020 ;Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ).

In addition, in this study, nursing students regarded the EBN course designed with differentiated instruction as worth taking and considered differentiated instruction worth applying to other courses. These results are congruent with previous studies that students generally responded favourably to differentiated instruction and preferred to experiment with applying the course design in other classrooms (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). More surprisingly, at the end of the course, more nursing students agreed that nurses with a BSN degree needed to perform EBN when compared to nurses with a master's or doctoral degree. Two reasons might explain this result. One is that while students might not understand the master's and doctoral programmes, they gained learning interests in the subject designed with differentiated instruction. The other might be that healthcare‐related institutions have asserted that healthcare professionals should use the most validated research findings as evidence to make decisions for patient care (AACN, 2021 ). Therefore, students were aware that the EBN is a growing trend and momentum in clinical nursing practice.

The learning styles preferred by students in the study were kinaesthetic, tactile and group learning. These results indicated that nursing students preferred to learn through hands‐on practices, physical and active involvement in classroom, and valued group work and interaction with teammates. These findings were quite different from previous studies with nursing students. Mckenna et al. ( 2018 ) found that students in the Master of Science in Nursing programme preferred kinaesthetic learning to auditory learning, whereas undergraduate nursing students preferred either auditory (Soliman, 2017 ) or visual learning style (Alharbi et al., 2017 ). Some other studies found that dental students preferred an auditory learning style (Akhlaghi et al., 2018 ). Different cultural backgrounds might be the reason for this difference.

Researchers proposed that embedded use of differentiated instruction with various teaching strategies could develop opportunities for students to maximize individual growth and success in learning (Gheyssens et al., 2020 ; Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ; Ramdani et al., 2021 ). Our study found that the individual learning style score significantly decreased but the group learning style score significantly increased at the end of the semester. The combining use of differentiated instruction and other teaching strategies such as collaborative learning with flexible grouping in this study created a more supportive learning environment for students to meet their multiple learning needs. Collaborative learning constructs a learning environment that offers opportunities for students to work with peers who own different learning styles. This environment enables individuals to experience and learn different learning styles from group members and promote individuals' performance achievement from the newly gained learning styles and from the help of higher achievers in the team (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ). Our study also found that at the end of the semester, the number of preferred learning styles used by students increased.

We found in the study that differentiated instruction had positive effects on students' classroom engagement, and attitudes towards EBN and EBN knowledge. These results were congruent with previous studies that differentiated instruction positively impacted students' learning process and academic performance by improving student engagement and learning attitude towards the lessons (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ; Haelermans, 2022 ; Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ). In other words, the learning environment influences students' learning experiences. A learning environment that provides students with insufficient motivation to learn might lead to students' disengagement with the classroom. The EBN course was developed based on the spirit of differentiated instruction, which has been considered as contributing to the creation of a comfortable learning environment and the formation of positive motivation to learn (Iqbal et al., 2020 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). In addition, differentiated instruction is a student‐centred approach that has been suggested as conducive to behaviourally, emotionally or cognitively engaging students in learning through participation in classroom activities, and interaction with teachers and classmates (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ). The student‐centred learning environment also offers opportunities for students to transform their learning behaviour from passive to active (Ismail & Allaq, 2019 ).

Nursing students' attitudes towards EBN were significantly more positive at the end of the course. The result is similar to one previous research finding that the differentiated instruction approach had a positive effect on non‐nursing undergraduate students' attitudes towards course learning (Darra & Kanellopoulou, 2019 ). Students' EBN knowledge significantly improved at the end of the semester as well was supported by other studies that used differentiated instruction. These previous studies exhibited results of improvement in academic performances among non‐university students such as greater gains in calculus or mathematical understanding (Chen & Chen, 2018 ), and outperformance in the course examination (Haelermans, 2022 ). Learning satisfaction for the EBN course among nursing students also significantly increased at the end of the course. Differentiated instruction that furnishes students with diverse learning methods to choose from can meet individuals' learning needs and is conducive to students' learning (Iqbal et al., 2020 ), motivation (Chen & Chen, 2018 ; Sapan & Mede, 2022 ) and performance (Chen & Chen, 2018 ; Haelermans, 2022 ). When students' learning needs are satisfied, naturally, they are satisfied with the course.

6. STUDY LIMITATIONS

Although differentiated instruction exhibits positive effects on nursing students' learning outcomes, the results of differentiated instruction designed for the EBN subject are still preliminary. The study findings are limited because of the incapability to build a substantial, causal relationship test between the effectiveness of differentiated instruction and the learning outcomes. The major limitation of this study is the single‐group research design, which is susceptible to threatening the effectiveness of the intervention. Without a comparison group, it is challenging to confirm whether the intervention can be successfully performed in other contexts. The study is also limited due to the insufficiency of generalizability of its study population, such as few samples and a homogenous cultural background in the study participants. Therefore, further studies are recommended for researchers to include a comparison group to furnish more vigorous experimental evidence for the effectiveness of differentiated instruction. Including more study participants as nursing students in other nursing programmes, such as the regular 4‐year bachelor's degree or 5‐year diploma programme or inviting a variety of other nursing schools, are encouraged to increase the strength of the generalizability of the results.

7. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

Nurses demonstrating competence in providing EBN is emphasized in current clinical practice. Nursing students, the future nurses, need also to have the EBN ability to seamlessly connect to future clinical nursing practice. This study indicates that the application of differentiated instruction in mixed‐ability classrooms in the EBN course improved students' learning outcomes, attitudes towards EBN and EBN knowledge and learning satisfaction. These results are different from the previous findings that students consider the EBN course as complicated and difficult since courses designed with differentiated instruction meet the learning needs of students with different academic abilities and strengthen and give various opportunities for students to learn. In clinical settings where nurses are even more diverse in academic education, clinical experiences and learning preferences, differentiated instruction can be a suitable application for in‐service training and education to promote nurses' enthusiasm for professional learning.

8. CONCLUSION

Differentiated instruction has been popularly applied in elementary and secondary schools internationally. Yet, limited empirical study has been reported about this approach applied in higher education, especially for nursing education. Moreover, there is a paucity of literature reporting the application of this pedagogy, specifically, the outcome evaluations of application in EBN courses. The study designed the EBN course based on differentiated instruction for undergraduate nursing students in order to provide a supportive learning environment and to furnish a vivid pedagogical way for the unique nursing profession. The findings indicate that implementing differentiated instruction in the EBN course improved students' classroom engagement, group learning style, learning satisfaction, attitudes towards EBN and EBN knowledge. The positive results of the study contribute to the existing body of knowledge by providing evidence of the positive effects of differentiated instruction in the EBN course. Differentiated instruction has the potential to be beneficial not only in academia but also in clinical in‐service training and education, by addressing the diverse academic backgrounds, clinical experiences and learning preferences of nurses. Further research in this field can expand upon these findings and establish a stronger foundation for effectively implementing differentiated instruction in nursing education, both in academic and clinical contexts.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization: SRL, CYC, CHC and TPC; Data curation: SRL, CYC and CHC; Formal Analysis: CYC and CHC; Funding acquisition: SRL and CYC; Investigation: SRL and HCL; Methodology: SRL, CYC and HCL; Project administration: SRL, CYC, HCL and TPC; Supervision: SRL and CYC; Validation: SRL, CYC and TPC; Writing—original draft: SRL, CYC and TPC; Writing—review and editing: SRL, CYC, CHC, TPC and HCL.

FUNDING INFORMATION

This research was funded by the Chang Gung Medical Research Program, grant number CMRPF6K0051 and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST 107‐2511‐H‐255‐002‐) in Taiwan.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

ETHICS STATEMENT

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the investigator’s serving institution. Written consent was obtained from all participants, ensuring confidentiality, anonymity, and the option to participate. The participants were assured that refusal to participate or answer certain questions would not affect their academic grades.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank all funders for financial support and students for their participation.

Liou, S.‐R. , Cheng, C.‐Y. , Chu, T.‐P. , Chang, C.‐H. , & Liu, H.‐C. (2023). Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on learning outcomes and learning satisfaction in the evidence‐based nursing course: Empirical research quantitative . Nursing Open , 10 , 6794–6807. 10.1002/nop2.1926 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Akhlaghi, N. , Mirkazemi, H. , Jafarzade, M. , & Akhlaghi, N. (2018). Does learning style preferences influence academic performance among dental students in Isfahan, Iran? Journal of educational evaluation for health professions , 15 , 8. 10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.8 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Alharbi, H. A. , Almutairi, A. F. , Alhelih, E. M. , & Alshehry, A. S. (2017). The learning preferences among nursing students in the King Saud University in Saudi Arabia: A cross‐sectional survey . Nursing Research and Practice , 2017 , 3090387. 10.1155/2017/3090387 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Alrabia, F. (2021). The influence of autonomy‐supportive teaching on EFL students' classroom autonomy: An experimental intervention . Frontiers in Psychology , 12 ( 728657 ), 1–15. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.728657 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
American Association of College Nursing (AACN) . (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing education . https://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/42/AcademicNursing/pdf/Essentials‐2021.pdf
An, Y. , & Mindrila, D. (2020). Strategies and tools used for learner‐centered instruction . International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES) , 4 ( 2 ), 133–143. [ Google Scholar ]
Benton, S. L. , & Li, D. (2015). Validity and Reliability of IDEA Teaching Essentials (IDEA Research Rep. No. 8) . The IDEA Center. https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/Research%20Reports/Research%20Report%208.pdf
Boelens, R. , Voet, M. , & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors' views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning . Computers & Education , 120 , 197–212. 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Chen, J. H. , & Chen, Y. C. (2018). Differentiated instruction in a calculus curriculum for college students in Taiwan . Journal of Education and Learning , 7 ( 1 ), 88–95. 10.5539/jel.v7n1p88 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Darra, M. , & Kanellopoulou, E. M. (2019). The implementation of the differentiated instruction in higher education: A research review . International Journal of Education , 11 ( 3 ), 151–172. 10.5296/ije.v11i3.15307 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gheyssens, E. , Struyven, K. , & Griful‐Freixenet, J. (2020). Differentiated instruction as a student‐centered teaching approach in teacher education. In Hoidn S., & Klemenčič M. (Eds.), The international handbook of student‐centered learning and teaching inhigher education (1st ed. pp. 254–268). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429259371 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Haelermans, C. (2022). The effects of group differentiation by students' learning strategies . Instructional Science , 50 , 223–250. 10.1007/s11251-021-09575-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hapsari, T. , Darhim, & Dahlan, J. A. (2018). Understanding and responding the students in learning mathematics through the differentiated instruction . Journal of Physics: Conference Series , 1013 12136. 10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012136 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Iqbal, J. , Khan, A. M. , & Nisar, M. (2020). Impact of differentiated instruction on student learning: Perception of students and teachers . Global Regional Review , V(I) , 364–375. 10.31703/grr.2020(V-I).40 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ismail, S. A. A. , & Allaq, K. A. (2019). The nature of cooperative learning and differentiated instruction practices in English classes . SAGE Open , 9 , 1–17. 10.1177/2158244019856450 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Levine, R. E. , O'Boyle, M. , Haidet, P. , Lynn, D. J. , Stone, M. M. , Wolf, D. V. , & Paniagua, F. A. (2004). Transforming a clinical clerkship with team learning . Teaching and Learning in Medicine , 16 ( 3 ), 270–275. 10.1207/s15328015tlm1603_9 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lumatauw, L. , Wollah, M. , & Tulangow, R. (2020). Application of student centered learning (SCL) method through discovery strategies in vocational educations . Open Journal of Social Sciences , 8 , 82–90. 10.4236/jss.2020.811008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Magableh, I. S. I. , & Abdullah, A. (2020). On the effectiveness of differentiated instruction in the enhancement of Jordanian students' overall achievement . International Journal of Instruction , 13 ( 2 ), 533–548. 10.29333/iji.2020.13237a [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mckenna, L. , Copnell, B. , Butler, A. E. , & Lau, R. (2018). Learning style preferences of Australian accelerated postgraduate preregistration nursing students: A cross‐sectional survey . Nurse Education in Practice , 28 , 280–284. 10.1016/j.nepr.2017.10.011 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Melnyk, B. M. , & Fineout‐Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence‐based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice . Wolters Kluwer. [ Google Scholar ]
Mukhalalati, B. A. , & Taylor, A. (2019). Adult learning theories in context: A quick guide for healthcare professional educators . Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development , 6 , 1–10. 10.1177/2382120519840332 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
National League for Nursing (NLN) . (2020). Hallmarks of excellence . https://www.nln.org/docs/default‐source/uploadedfiles/default‐document‐library/hallmarks‐of‐excellence‐2019.pdf?sfvrsn=7d92a60d_0
Nelson‐Brantley, H. V. , Beckman, D. , Parchment, J. , Smith‐Miller, C. A. , & Weaver, S. H. (2020). Magnet® and pathway to excellence®: Focusing on research and evidence‐based practice . The Journal of Nursing Administration , 50 ( 5 ), 245–247. 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000877 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Nguyen, K. A. , Borrego, M. , Finelli, C. J. , DeMonbrun, M. , Crockett, C. , Tharayil, S. , Shekhar, P. , Waters, C. , & Rosenberg, R. (2021). Instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning: A systematic literature review . International Journal of STEM Education , 8 ( 9 ), 1–18. 10.1186/s40594-021-00270-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Norwood, S. L. (2000). Research strategies for advanced practice nurses . Prentice‐Hall, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
O'Malley, K. J. , Moran, B. J. , Haidet, P. , Seidel, C. L. , Schneider, V. , Morgan, R. O. , Kelly, P. A. , & Richards, B. (2003). Validation of an observation instrument for measuring student engagement in health professions settings . Evaluation & the Health Professions , 26 ( 1 ), 86–103. 10.1177/0163278702250093 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ramdani, Z. , Amri, A. , Hadiana, D. , Warsihna, J. , Anas, Z. , & Susanti, S. (2021). Students diversity and the implementation of adaptive learning and assessment: A systematic literature review . Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research , 639 , 157–161. 10.2991/assehr.k.220203.025 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Reid, J. M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students . TESOL Quarterly , 21 ( 1 ), 87–111. 10.2307/3586356 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Reid, J. M. (1995). Preface. In Reid J. M. (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. viii–xvii). Heinle & Heinle. [ Google Scholar ]
Sapan, M. , & Mede, E. (2022). The effects of differentiated instruction (DI) on achievement, motivation, and autonomy among English learners . Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research , 10 ( 1 ), 127–144. 10.30466/ijltr.2022.121125 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Soliman, S. M. (2017). Learning style preferences and perceptions of undergraduate nursing students upon applying web‐based learning modules . IOSR Journal of Nursing and Health Science , 6 ( 2 ), 68–74. 10.9790/1959-0602096874 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tlili, M. A. , Aouicha, W. , Tarchoune, S. , Sahli, J. , Dhiab, M. B. , Chelbi, S. , Mtiraoui, A. , Ajmi, T. , Rejeb, M. B. , & Mallouli, M. (2022). Predictors of evidence‐based practice competency among Tunisian nursing students . BMC Medical Education , 22 ( 421 ), 1–9. 10.1186/s12909-022-03487-4 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades . ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED443572.pdf
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed‐ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. [ Google Scholar ]
Trolian, T. L. , & Parker, E. T., III . (2022). Shaping students' attitudes toward diversity: Do faculty practices and interactions with students matter? Research in Higher Education , 63 , 849–870. 10.1007/s11162-021-09668-2 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Trullàs, J. C. , Blay, C. , & Pujol, R. (2022). Effectiveness of problem‐based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: A scoping review . BMC Medical Education , 22 ( 104 ), 1–12. 10.1186/s12909-022-03154-8 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Turner, W. D. , Solis, O. J. , & Kincade, D. H. (2017). Differentiating instruction for large classes in higher education . International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education , 29 ( 3 ), 490–500. [ Google Scholar ]

Differentiated Instruction

Differentiated instruction involves teaching in a way that meets the different needs and interests of students using varied course content, activities, and assessments.

Teaching differently to different students

Differentiated Instruction (DI) is fundamentally the attempt to teach differently to different students, rather than maintain a one-size-fits-all approach to instruction. Other frameworks, such as Universal Design for Learning , enjoin instructors to give students broad choice and agency to meet their diverse needs and interests. DI distinctively emphasizes instructional methods to promote learning for students entering a course with different readiness for, interest in, and ways of engaging with course learning based on their prior learning experiences ( Dosch and Zidon 2014).

Successful implementation of DI requires ongoing training, assessment, and monitoring (van Geel et al. 2019) and has been shown to be effective in meeting students’ different needs, readiness levels, and interests (Turner et al. 2017). Below, you can find six categories of DI instructional practices that span course design and live teaching.

While some of the strategies are best used together, not all of them are meant to be used at once, as the flexibility inherent to these approaches means that some of them are diverging when used in combination (e.g., constructing homogenous student groups necessitates giving different types of activities and assessments; constructing heterogeneous student groups may pair well with peer tutoring) (Pozas et al. 2020). The learning environment the instructor creates with students has also been shown to be an important part of successful DI implementation (Shareefa et al. 2019).

Differentiated Assessment

Differentiated assessment is an aspect of Differentiated Instruction that focuses on tailoring the ways in which students can demonstrate their progress to their varied strengths and ways of learning. Instead of testing recall of low-level information, instructors should focus on the use of knowledge and complex reasoning. Differentiation should inform not only the design of instructors’ assessments, but also how they interpret the results and use them to inform their DI practices.

More Team Project Ideas

Steps to consider

There are generally considered to be six categories of useful differentiated instruction and assessment practices (Pozas & Schneider 2019):

Making assignments that have tasks and materials that are qualitatively and/or quantitatively varied (according to “challenge level, complexity, outcome, process, product, and/or resources”) (IP Module 2: Integrating Peer-to-Peer Learning) It’s helpful to assess student readiness and interest by collecting data at the beginning of the course, as well as to conduct periodic check-ins throughout the course (Moallemi 2023 & Pham 2011)
Making student working groups that are intentionally chosen (that are either homogeneous or heterogeneous based on “performance, readiness, interests, etc.”) (IP Module 2: Integrating Peer-to-Peer Learning) Examples of how to make different student groups provided by Stanford CTL (Google Doc)
Making tutoring systems within the working group where students teach each other (IP Module 2: Integrating Peer-to-Peer Learning) For examples of how to support peer instruction, and the benefits of doing so, see for example Tullis & Goldstone 2020 and Peer Instruction for Active Learning (LSA Technology Services, University of Michigan)
Making non-verbal learning aids that are staggered to provide support to students in helping them get to the next step in the learning process (only the minimal amount of information that is needed to help them get there is provided, and this step is repeated each time it’s needed) (IP Module 4: Making Success Accessible) Non-verbal cue cards support students’ self-regulation, as they can monitor and control their progress as they work (Pozas & Schneider 2019)
Making instructional practices that ensure all students meet at least the minimum standards and that more advanced students meet higher standards , which involves monitoring students’ learning process carefully (IP Module 4: Making Success Accessible; IP Module 5: Giving Inclusive Assessments) This type of approach to student assessment can be related to specifications grading, where students determine the grade they want and complete the modules that correspond to that grade, offering additional motivation to and reduced stress for students and additional flexibility and time-saving practices to instructors (Hall 2018)
Making options that support student autonomy in being responsible for their learning process and choosing material to work on (e.g., students can choose tasks, project-based learning, portfolios, and/or station work, etc.) (IP Module 4: Making Success Accessible) This option, as well as the others, fits within a general Universal Design Learning framework , which is designed to improve learning for everyone using scientific insights about human learning

Hall, M (2018). “ What is Specifications Grading and Why Should You Consider Using It? ” The Innovator Instructor blog, John Hopkins University Center for Teaching Excellence and Innovation.

Moallemi, R. (2023). “ The Relationship between Differentiated Instruction and Learner Levels of Engagement at University .” Journal of Research in Integrated Teaching and Learning (ahead of print).

Pham, H. (2011). “ Differentiated Instruction and the Need to Integrate Teaching and Practice .” Journal of College Teaching and Learning , 9(1), 13-20.

Pozas, M. & Schneider, C. (2019). " Shedding light into the convoluted terrain of differentiated instruction (DI): Proposal of a taxonomy of differentiated instruction in the heterogeneous classroom ." Open Education Studies , 1, 73–90.

Pozas, M., Letzel, V. and Schneider, C. (2020). " Teachers and differentiated instruction: exploring differentiation practices to address student diversity ." Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 20: 217-230.

Shareefa, M. et al. (2019). “ Differentiated Instruction: Definition and Challenging Factors Perceived by Teachers .” Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Special Education (ICSE 2019).

Tullis, J.G. & Goldstone, R.L. (2020). “ Why does peer instruction benefit student learning? ”, Cognitive Research 5 .

Turner, W.D., Solis, O.J., and Kincade, D.H. (2017). “ Differentiating Instruction for Large Classes in Higher Education ”, International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education , 29(3), 490-500.

van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Frèrejean, J., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J., & Visscher A.J. (2019). “Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 30:1, 51-67, DOI: 10.1080/09243453.2018.1539013

IMAGES

A practice framework for differentiated instruction. Adapted from Rock
What is Differentiated Instruction? Examples of How to Differentiate
A research model of differentiated (diff.) instruction (adapted from
What Is Differentiated Instruction? 10 Examples & Non-Examples
What is differentiated instruction?
How to Differentiate Instruction?

VIDEO

Topics in Education: Successful Differentiated Instruction
differentiate Instruction
Learning Strategies for Exceptional Learners
Differentiating Instruction, 3-6, Part II: Tiering Assignments and Multiple Intelligences
Planning Process-Differentiated Instruction with Technology
How to Use Differentiated Instruction for Teaching Communication

COMMENTS

How Does Changing "One-Size-Fits-All" to Differentiated Instruction
How Does Changing "One-Size-Fits-All" to Differentiated ...
PDF Differentiated instruction: A research basis
Differentiated instruction: A research basis
Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education: A Systematic Review
Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education
(PDF) BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A ...
This study investigates the impact of Differentiated Instruction (DI) in high school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education, analyzing its influence on students' perceptions, motivation ...
Differentiating instruction: Understanding the key elements for
Differentiating instruction: Understanding the key elements ...
Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Establish Effective
Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Establish ...
Differentiated instruction in secondary education: A systematic review
Differentiated instruction is a pedagogical-didactical approach that provides teachers with a starting point for meeting students' diverse learning needs. Although differentiated instruction has gained a lot of attention in practice and research, not much is known about the status of the empirical evidence and its benefits for enhancing student achievement in secondary education. The current ...
Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction
Providing differentiated instruction (DI) is considered an important but complex teaching skill which many teachers have not mastered and feel unprepared for. In order to design professional development activities, a thorough description of DI is required. The international literature on assessing teachers' differentiation qualities describes ...
Variables that influence teachers' practice of differentiated
2.1.1. Philosophies of differentiated instruction: Growth mindset and ethical compass. According to the definition provided by Dweck (2006), growth mindset is an implicit belief concerning the stability of capability.Teachers with a growth mindset generally embrace students' interests, readiness, and learning profiles as the basis for differentiating their teaching, which may lead students ...
Differentiated Instruction, Perceptions and Practices
Research Design and Method. A qualitative research design was used to explore teachers' perceptions and experiences of differentiated instruction, as it allows the research to capture the "value depth of meaning and people's subjective experiences and their meaning making processes" (Leavy, 2017, p. 124). To obtain data in a particular school setting, taking into consideration the ...
Promoting High-Achieving Students Through Differentiated Instruction in
In two studies from the United States, more than two-thirds of the students said that their instruction is not differentiated and that they learn the same content, at the same level, and the same pace as the other students (Assouline et al., 2013; Swiatek & Lupkowski-Shoplik, 2003). In the third study, from Turkey, the picture was somewhat ...
(PDF) Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education: A Systematic
The majority of the studies show small to moderate positive effects of differentiated instruction on student achievement. Summarized effect sizes across studies range from d = +0.741 to +0.509 ...
Teachers and differentiated instruction: exploring differentiation
Teachers and differentiated instruction: exploring ...
(PDF) Differentiated Instruction: A Study on Teachers ...
This study investigates teachers' experiences and opinions on differentiated instruction, and the. factors behind these experiences and opinions. Thus, findings a re expected to be the voices of ...
Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education: A ...
Differentiated instruction is a pedagogical-didactical approach that provides teachers with a starting point for meeting students' diverse learning needs. Although differentiated instruction has gained a lot of attention in practice and research, not much is known about the status of the empirical evidence and its benefits for enhancing student ...
Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on learning outcomes and
Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on learning ...
Differentiating instruction in primary and middle schools: Does
In the current study, it was hypothesized that the variation in students' background attributes (students' background knowledge, interest, readiness and learning profile) would have direct influence on four dimensions of differentiated instruction, viz. content differentiation, process differentiation, learning environment differentiation ...
Differentiated Instruction
Differentiated Instruction | Center for Teaching and Learning
(PDF) Assessing the Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction
The majority of the studies show small to moderate positive effects of differentiated instruction on student achievement. Summarized effect sizes across studies range from d = +0.741 to +0.509 ...
The Practicality and Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction in
Abstract. Differentiated instruction has seen an increase in use as teachers attempt to solve the. issue of engaging every student when their needs, interests, and abilities greatly vary. This is. especially true for students who are in or qualify for special education. However, barriers such as.
Differentiated Instruction: Definition and Challenging Factors
PDF | Differentiated Instruction (DI) is a teaching strategy teachers adopt to attend to student diversity in inclusive classrooms. ... research, study groups, or workshops can allow dialogue an d ...
Differentiated Instructions: Relevant Studies on Its Implementation
This study aimed at investigating the implementation of English teacher's differentiated instruction to disabled student in an inclusive school. This study was a qualitative research which ...
(PDF) Research on Differentiated Instruction
14 different countries, various research methods, 1 topic: Differentiated Instruction. With the increasingly diverse student population in schools, the establishment of inclusive classrooms has ...