differentiated learning research studies

What Research Says About . . . / Differentiated Learning

What we know, what you can do, educators take note.

Researchers at the National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum define differentiated instruction asa process to approach teaching and learning for students of differing abilities in the same class. The intent is to maximize each student's growth and individual success by meeting each student where he or she is . . . rather than expecting students to modify themselves for the curriculum. (Hall, 2002)

• Focus on the essential ideas and skills of the content area, eliminating ancillary tasks and activities.
• Respond to individual student differences (such as learning style, prior knowledge, interests, and level of engagement).
• Group students flexibly by shared interest, topic, or ability.
• Integrate ongoing and meaningful assessments with instruction.
• Continually assess; reflect; and adjust content, process, and product to meet student needs.

Allan, S. D., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Anderson, K. M., (2007). Differentiating instruction to include all students. Preventing School Failure, 51 (3), 49–54.

Baumgartner, T., Lipowski, M. B., & Rush, C. (2003). Increasing reading achievement of primary and middle school students through differentiated instruction (Master's research). Available from Education Resources Information Center (ERIC No. ED479203).

Ellis, E. S., & Worthington, L. A. (1994). Research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators (Technical Report No. 5). Eugene: University of Oregon, National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.

Hall, T. (2002). Differentiated instruction [Online]. Wakefield, MA: CAST. Available: www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_diffinstruc.html

Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education 32 (3), 34.

McQuarrie, L., McRae, P., & Stack-Cutler, H. (2008). Differentiated instruction provincial research review . Edmonton: Alberta Initiative for School Improvement.

Rock, M., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52 (2), 31–47.

Tieso, C. (2005). The effects of grouping practices and curricular adjustments on achievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29 (1), 60–89.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Leadership for differentiated classrooms. The School Administrator, 56 (9), 6–11.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. ERIC Digest . Available: www.ericdigests.org/2001-2/elementary.html

Tomlinson, C., & Kalbfleisch, M. L. (1998). Teach me, teach my brain: A call for differentiated classrooms. Educational Leadership, 56 (3), 52–55.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Strickland, C. A. (2005). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for differentiating curriculum, grades 9–12 . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Vaughn, S., Bos, C., & Schumm, J. (2000). Teaching exceptional, diverse, and at-risk students in the general education classroom (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Vygotsky, L. S., (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

ASCD is a community dedicated to educators' professional growth and well-being.

Let us help you put your vision into action., from our issue.

To process a transaction with a Purchase Order please send to [email protected]

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

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
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
• PMC10166050

Language: English | French

Planning for Differentiated Instruction: Empowering Teacher Candidates in STEM Education

Mohammed estaiteyeh.

1 Faculty of Education, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St., L2S 3A1 Catharines, ON Canada

Isha DeCoito

2 Faculty of Education, Western University, 1137 Western Road, N6G 1G7 London, ON Canada

Associated Data

Raw data is available for transparency purposes.

Differentiated instruction (DI) is an inclusive method of instruction by which teachers provide multiple possibilities for learning based on students’ backgrounds, readiness, interests, and profiles. Acknowledging student diversity in Canadian classrooms, this study explores STEM teacher candidates’ (TCs’) preparation to implement DI in a STEM curriculum and pedagogy course in a teacher education program. The course is enriched with DI resources and training focused on equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). The course efficacy in enhancing TCs’ implementation of DI is explored through the following research questions: (1) What is the impact of the course on TCs’ implementation of DI, (2) How do TCs develop curricula to be inclusive of DI strategies, and (3) What successes and challenges do TCs encounter when developing DI-focused curricula? The study adopts a mixed-method approach, in which data sources include pre-post questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Participants are 19 TCs enrolled in the second year of the teacher education program at a Canadian university. Findings suggest that the course empowered TCs to integrate DI principles and strategies in their coursework. This success reiterates the importance of opportunities aimed at enhancing teachers’ preparation to incorporate DI in their practices. The findings call for adopting similar approaches in pre-service and in-service teachers’ training to ensure that DI principles and strategies are deeply rooted in teachers’ practices. The study informs teacher educators about integrating EDI in teacher education programs’ curriculum and overall planning.

Résumé

La différenciation pédagogique (DP) est une méthode d’enseignement inclusive selon laquelle les enseignants offrent plusieurs possibilités d’apprentissage en fonction du milieu dont sont issus les élèves, de leur réceptivité, leurs champs d’intérêts et de leurs profils. S’appuyant sur le fait qu’il existe une diversité d’élèves dans les salles de classe canadiennes, cette étude explore la préparation des aspirants enseignants (AE) des STIM à la mise en application de la DP dans un cours du curriculum et de la pédagogie des STIM au programme de formation des enseignants. Le cours est rehaussé par le biais de ressources en DP et d’une formation axée sur l’équité, la diversité et l’inclusion (EDI). On explore comment l’efficacité du cours peut servir à améliorer la mise en pratique de la DP par les AE à l’aide des questions de recherche suivantes: 1) Quel est l’impact du cours sur la mise en œuvre de la DP par les AE, 2) Comment les AE élaborent-ils des programmes qui intègrent les stratégies de DP, et 3) À quelles réussites et difficultés les AE font-ils face lorsqu’ils élaborent des programmes axés sur la DP ? L’étude adopte une approche méthodologique mixte, dans laquelle les sources de données comprennent des questionnaires « avant-après» et des entrevues semi-structurées. 19 AE inscrits en deuxième année du programme de formation des enseignants d’une université canadienne participent à l’étude. Les résultats indiquent que le cours a doté les AE de moyens d’intégrer les principes et les stratégies de la DP dans leurs travaux de cours. Cette réussite réitère l’importance d’avoir des occasions qui contribuent à améliorer la préparation des enseignants pour intégrer la DP dans leurs pratiques. Les résultats appellent à l’adoption d’approches similaires dans la formation initiale des enseignants et celle des enseignants sur place afin de s’assurer que les principes et les stratégies de la DP sont profondément enracinés dans les pratiques des enseignants. L’étude renseigne les formateurs d’enseignants sur l’intégration de l’EDI dans les programmes d’éducation des enseignants et dans la planification générale.

Introduction

Schools in Canada are well known for student diversity. One of the main reasons behind this diversity is the increase in the number of immigrants. For instance, the number of new immigrants who arrived in Canada between 2016 and 2021 was 1,328,240, with more than 450 ethnic or cultural origins existing in 2021 (Statistics Canada, 2022 ). According to Statistics Canada ( 2017 ), two in five Canadian children had an immigrant background in 2016, meaning they are foreign-born or had at least one foreign-born parent. By 2031, nearly half (46%) of Canadians aged 15 and older could have an immigrant background. These demographic factors also reflect diversity in socio-economic status (SES), cultural differences, and linguistic abilities.

Together, these societal changes directly affect the student composition of classrooms, rendering them very heterogenous spaces, especially when considering additional differences among students in their interests, individual needs, unique learning profiles, and academic achievement levels (Campbell, 2021 ; Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). Accordingly, curricula in Canadian classrooms are moving toward inclusive design, an approach that considers diversity with respect to students’ ability, language, culture, race, sexual orientation, creed, gender, and lived experiences (Malloy, 2019 ). Novel plans have been established across provinces to incorporate inclusive practices such as Ontario’s Education Equity Action Plan ( 2017 ) that supports school boards to develop equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) education policies and effectively implement classroom practices that “reflect the needs and diverse realities of all students” (p. 16). The plan hints at incorporating culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995 , 2014 ) and culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2010 ). Moreover, the plan aims to strengthen inclusive teaching, assessment, and resources, and provide professional development (PD) and support focused on equity and inclusion for teachers.

Despite these plans and policies, there remains much work to be done. Rezai-Rashti et al. ( 2015 , 2017 ) highlight the invisibility of race and antiracism in Ontario’s policies and call for addressing the underlying structural and systemic imbalances. This outcome can be achieved through mechanisms that hold educational institutions accountable and provide the required resources to ensure the implementation of said policies. In harmony, the Ontario Ministry of Education reports that the recommended improvements did not fully provide equitable outcomes for all students, and further actions are required to overcome persistent systematic barriers, biases, and inequalities (Campbell, 2021 ). With respect to science education, Mujawamariya et al. ( 2014 ) critically analyze the content of Ontario’s science curricula for Grades 1 to 10 and maintain that small recent progress has been made to support multicultural science education. The authors highlight how antiracist content remains poorly integrated into Ontario science curricula, how minority students are excluded, and how the text is still dominated by a Western rather than an inclusive paradigm. In harmony, Madkins and Morton ( 2021 ) argue that teacher candidates (TCs) must be prepared to disrupt anti-blackness in science and mathematics education by developing their political clarity. Madkins and Morton define political clarity as the understanding of structural and school inequalities and engaging in equity-focused science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) teaching.

At the classroom level, the written organizational plans must identify the role of teachers and their responsibility in attending to the needs of their students. The literature recommends that teachers be more involved in the processes of improving inclusive curricula, materials, and their support for students (Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). Thus, it is fundamental to target the knowledge base of pre-service teachers as they embark on teaching careers in classrooms that reflect heterogeneous student populations. This measure will enable them to utilize transformative inclusive teaching strategies, such as differentiated instruction (DI) (Egbo, 2012 ). This research attempts to walk the EDI talk in schools by promoting TCs’ views, understandings, and implementation of DI as an equitable and inclusive teaching philosophy.

Research Rationale

Differentiated instruction is an adaptive method of instruction by which teachers provide multiple possibilities for learning based on students’ backgrounds, readiness, interests, and profiles (De Jesus, 2012 ; Tomlinson, 2001 ; Valiandes & Tarman, 2011 ). According to Tomlinson et al. ( 2003 ), the role of educators needs to focus on how to differentiate rather than if they should differentiate . Yet, the literature on DI shows lack of regular implementation by teachers in their classrooms (DiPirro, 2017 ; Robinson, 2017 ; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010 ), thus providing additional rationale for the need to enhance teacher preparation in this regard. Additionally, research on DI implementation and teacher preparation in Canadian classrooms specifically is scarce despite the aforementioned context and policies (Whitley et al., 2019 ). Manavathu and Zhou ( 2012 ) maintain that the implementation of DI in Canadian classrooms faces many barriers. For example, they highlight how teachers feel unprepared to accommodate English language learners (ELLs) and how ELLs are less likely to enroll in senior biology courses due to the language complexity. Accordingly, Manavathu and Zhou call for the development of linguistically appropriate science course materials and consideration of students’ individual sociopsychological influences to enhance their science learning. Additionally, D’Intino and Wang ( 2021 ) emphasize that Canadian teachers need more support to be able to differentiate their instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Specht et al. ( 2016 ) indicate the specific need for secondary school level TCs’ training on inclusive teaching strategies, since they show lower self-efficacy in relation to inclusive teaching compared to their elementary school counterparts. Finally, DI applications in STEM education at the secondary school level are limited, since most of the research has been conducted on DI in languages and mathematics for primary and middle school (Kamarulzaman et al., 2018 ; Maeng, 2017 ). Thus, the current research is warranted as it addresses teacher education in Ontario, specifically how to differentiate instruction by engaging TCs in developing DI-focused STEM curricula.

Research Objectives and Questions

This research focuses on intermediate-senior STEM TCs’ teacher preparation, with an emphasis on their implementation of DI. The study highlights the impact of integrating DI-focused strategies in a STEM curriculum and pedagogy course in teacher education at a Canadian university by addressing the following questions:

• What is the impact of the course on TCs’ implementation of DI?
• How do TCs develop curricula to be inclusive of DI strategies?
• What successes and challenges do TCs encounter when developing DI-focused curricula?

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

Methods to differentiate instruction: cpp-rip framework.

Differentiated instruction is not a single strategy but rather an approach that affords many strategies (Watts-Taffe et al., 2012 ). Establishing a systematic approach to differentiation is important to make it more attainable for teachers to implement (Levy, 2008 ). In practice, DI can happen through modifying the content (what is taught), process (how learning is structured), and product (how learning is assessed), in addition to the physical learning environment (Tomlinson, 2001 ). These modifications are achieved through adaptation of the existing curriculum, development of lessons and resources, and implementation of teaching and assessment strategies (Beasley & Beck, 2017 ; Mitchell & Hobson, 2005 ; Tomlinson, 2014 ; Willis & Mann, 2000 ).

The content—knowledge, understanding, and skills—is what students are expected to learn. The process describes the methods designed throughout the lesson to reinforce students’ understanding of the content. The product refers to how students demonstrate their learning by means of assessment tools. It is how students show what they have come to know, understand, and are able to do after an extended period of learning (Tomlinson, 1999 ; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010 ). It is important to mention that these dimensions of DI are highly interconnected rather than independent (Watts-Taffe et al., 2012 ). Although there are core principles that guide the use of DI, its implementation depends on the individual needs of students in a particular classroom (Chamberlin & Powers, 2010 ). Tomlinson et al. ( 2003 ) indicate that when teachers differentiate the content, process, and product of teaching, three main factors must be considered as the basis of this differentiation: (1) students’ readiness which mainly reflects academic achievement levels, (2) students’ interest or choices, and (3) students’ learning profiles including their cultural backgrounds and lived experiences. This DI implementation framework, the content, process, product – readiness, interests, profiles (CPP-RIP) is utilized in this paper to analyze TCs’ implementation of DI.

Despite the fact that there is no single formula or method to apply DI (Valiandes & Tarman, 2011 ), specific teaching strategies include varying the learning pace for different students, curriculum compacting and chunking, varying the difficulty levels of tasks for different students, flexible grouping and learning centers based on student interests and/or learning needs, cooperative learning strategies, tiering activities, providing various levels of support and scaffolding to different students based on their readiness, using different modalities of teaching, and utilizing formative and diagnostic assessments to keep track of students’ progress (Birnie, 2017 ; Blackburn, 2018 ; Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). In conclusion, the hallmark of differentiating instruction is that it allows students to feel accepted by viewing their differences as assets that will strengthen the whole educational setting (George, 2005 ).

Teachers’ Implementation of DI

The literature on teachers’ implementation of DI reports that most teachers are aware of the practice, but many do not regularly implement it in their classrooms (DiPirro, 2017 ; Niccum-Johnson, 2018 ; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010 ). Niccum-Johnson ( 2018 ), for example, evaluated the consistency of 175 elementary teachers in Illinois in implementing DI. The results showed that only 60% of the teachers consistently used the elements of DI. Moreover, the study noted that teachers with a bachelor’s degree implemented DI more consistently than those with a master’s degree, while the years of experience had no effect. Robinson ( 2017 ) contradicted this inference and concluded that new teachers practiced the operational definition of DI more closely than veteran teachers who integrated DI into their daily activities more often. Santangelo and Tomlinson ( 2012 ) demonstrated that teacher educators did not implement a comprehensive model of differentiation. In line with this finding, Kendrick-Weikle ( 2015 ) stated that teachers differentiated the process component of their instruction, but they did not differentiate the contents and the products to the same extent. The study also noted that female teachers and teachers in larger schools were more familiar with DI and used accompanying strategies more often than male teachers, and teachers at smaller schools, respectively.

On the other hand, the implementation of DI in Canadian classrooms, especially in Ontario, is insufficiently researched. Limited studies exist, with most of the research conducted in Quebec and published in French (e.g., Moldoveanu et al., 2016 ; Paré & Prud’homme, 2014 ; Prud’Homme, 2007 ). Research has also been conducted with French language teachers (Guay et al., 2017 ; Roy et al., 2013 ) to support inclusion practices in Quebec, and in music classes (Kizas, 2016 ) and language arts in elementary schools in British Colombia (Tobin, 2007 ). Finally, a study conducted in elementary classrooms in Ontario showed that the instructional practices in public schools appeared to be cumulative rather than differentiated and that academically at-risk students received less DI than others (McGhie-Richmond et al., 2007 ).

Wan ( 2016 ) highlights that differentiating instruction is more complex in reality than it appears. Teachers could not cater to learners’ diversity as seamlessly due to the lack of practice utilizing differentiation strategies. Teachers in the study were afraid that differentiating, particularly assessment, was not fair to students in an exam-oriented environment. These findings reiterate the importance of teachers’ readiness and preparation to practice DI frequently and proficiently.

Challenges to Implementing DI

Several challenges that hinder teachers’ implementation of DI are documented, including (1) curricular requirements; (2) extensive teacher workload and lack of time; (3) limited curriculum resources; (4) lack of administrative support; (5) perceived complexity and difficulty; (6) class size and individual needs of students; and (7) insufficient number and quality of PD programs (de Jager, 2017 ; Park & Datnow, 2017 ; Turner & Solis, 2017 ; Wan, 2017 ). To capture the complexity of differentiating instruction, van Geel et al. ( 2019 ) use the cognitive task analysis to show what kind of knowledge and constituent skills are needed to be able to adapt instruction to the needs of the students. The results of the research identify six categories of teacher skills: (1) mastering the curriculum; (2) identifying instructional needs; (3) setting challenging goals; (4) monitoring and diagnosing student progress; (5) adapting instruction accordingly; and (6) general teaching dimension. This model serves as the basis for designing curricula and teacher PD initiatives. Moreover, research has shown the necessity and importance of PD initiatives for pre-service (Dack, 2018 ; Goodnough, 2010 ) and in-service teachers (Dixon et al., 2014 ; Nicolae, 2014 ; Pincince, 2016 ) to enhance their self-efficacy, understanding, and implementation of DI (e.g., Griful-Freixenet et al., 2021 ; Maeng, 2017 ; Nicolae, 2014 ; Paone, 2017 ; Rollins, 2010 ; Taylor, 2018 ; Wertheim & Leyser, 2002 ).

Correspondingly, research on exemplary differentiated STEM resources is scarce especially at the secondary school level. Thus, the aforementioned challenges of available curriculum resources, required time, and perceived difficulty are justified. This study addresses those challenges and the lack of PD related to DI. In this study, TCs engaged in designing and developing differentiated curriculum materials in STEM subjects. Successes and challenges of similar teacher preparation initiatives to enhance TCs’ familiarity and implementation of DI are highlighted. Additionally, specific strategies to differentiate instruction in secondary STEM classes are showcased.

Reflective Practice

Pollard and Tann ( 1997 ) describe reflective teaching as how teachers investigate their practice. Farrell ( 2015 ) defines reflective practice as “a cognitive process accompanied by a set of attitudes in which teachers systematically collect data about their practice, and while engaging in dialogue with others, use the data to make informed decisions about their practice” (p. 123). Hubball et al. ( 2005 ) maintain that when teachers engage in reflective practice, they question what they do, what works and what does not, and what rationales underlie their teaching and that of others. In harmony, Brantley-Dias et al. ( 2021 ) emphasize the crucial role of reflection in professional growth. By reflecting, teachers or TCs would engage in a cognitive process in which they understand an experience and make informed decisions for new actions. In this study, TCs engaged in reflective practice by reflecting on their actions consistently throughout the course. TCs reflected on various concepts throughout their learning as well as on each assignment they developed. Combined with feedback provided by their peers and the instructor, the study highlights how these forms of reflective practice contributed to their views, conceptions, and implementation of DI.

Methodology

Research design.

The study adopted a mixed-method approach (Creswell & Creswell, 2018 ), specifically a case study (Yin, 2014 ). Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Data sources include (1) pre- and post-course surveys exploring TCs’ views, understandings, and implementation of DI; and (2) semi-structured interviews detailing TCs’ implementation of DI in the course and in their practicum. Figure  1 summarizes the timeline of the course, and data sources and collection.

Course components and data collection timeline

Participants

A total of 19 TCs (9 males; 10 females) participated in the study. Participants were enrolled in a STEM Curriculum and Pedagogy course in the second year of the teacher education program at a university in Ontario, Canada. All TCs teach STEM subjects in the intermediate-senior divisions (Grades 9, 10, 11, and/or 12), including general sciences, biology, math, physics, chemistry, health and physical education, and computer studies. In terms of educational background, three TCs have a master’s degree while 16 TCs hold a bachelor’s degree.

Overview of the Course Design

Differentiated instruction principles and strategies were integrated through seminars, assignments, and resources using an explicit and reflective approach (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000 ). In the first session of the course, TCs’ prior understandings and views of DI were gauged through an online survey and a few diagnostic activities, including prompts using interactive presentation tools. Afterwards, in the first 2 weeks of the course, the course instructor collaborated with the researcher to provide a seminar on DI and EDI. Throughout the 12-week course, the instructor provided the TCs with resources to integrate DI and included tailored tasks requiring the application of DI principles and strategies, without changing the nature of the tasks that had been already planned for this course (DeCoito, in press ). As such, TCs completed three major curriculum development projects: (1) creating case studies around socio-scientific issues (SSI) (DeCoito & Fazio, 2017 ), (2) developing digital video games (DVGs) (DeCoito & Briona, 2020 ; Estaiteyeh & DeCoito, 2023 ), and (3) creating digital curriculum resources websites (DeCoito & Estaiteyeh, 2022 ).

TCs were requested to explicitly address DI in their coursework. Assignment rubrics included effective integration of DI as one of the success criteria. The instructor and researcher provided feedback on TCs’ work on a regular basis by recommending how to improve or maintain certain aspects of their assignments. TCs were also engaged in constant reflections on their progress and hence advancing their knowledge and skills in DI implementation throughout the course. Moreover, TCs presented their work to their peers, and provided and received peer feedback.

Data Sources

The pre-survey, composed of five open-ended questions, was administered online on the first day of the course. This survey explored TCs’ views and prior preparation with respect to DI. The post-survey, administered online on the last day of the course, included 43 5-point Likert scale items (1 = strong disagreement to 5 = strong agreement) and four open-ended questions. It explored TCs’ understanding and implementation of DI in the course, and their evaluation of the effectiveness of the course with respect to DI.

The Likert scale items were adopted from surveys (Roy et al., 2013 ; Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2012 ) that were tested for content validity and reliability. Santangelo and Tomlinson’s ( 2012 ) survey addressed teacher educators’ perceptions and use of DI practices, whereas Roy et al.’s ( 2013 ) DI scale included items related to instructional adaptations and assessment strategies in DI. On the other hand, the open-ended questions in both the pre- and post-surveys were developed by the researcher based on the research questions, the course tasks, and the literature. In total, 19 consenting TCs completed the pre-survey and 17 of them completed the post-survey.

Semi-structured Interview

Two months after the course ended, TCs were invited to participate in a 1-hour semi-structured online interview to follow-up on their responses in the pre/post-surveys and their course work. The interview explored in greater depth certain elements of the survey and course work, such as details of how TCs understood and implemented DI, and/or how they would implement it in their future practices. This interview was used to clarify, detail, and increase the trustworthiness of the other data sources. In total, six TCs participated in the interview.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data from the surveys were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Descriptive statistics were performed including calculating counts, averages, standard deviations, percentages, and differences between pre- and post-results. Additionally, inferential statistical tests were performed using SPSS. The Spearman correlation test was performed to explore the relationship between different ordinal variables, i.e., different 5-point Likert items (Connolly, 2007 ). On the other hand, qualitative data from open-ended survey questions and interviews were analyzed using an inductive process for some questions and a deductive process for others (Creswell & Creswell, 2018 ). The inductive analysis builds patterns, categories, and themes by organizing the data into more abstract units of information (Creswell & Creswell, 2018 ). Participants’ responses were inputted into NVivo 12 where initial codes were developed using word clouds based on the frequency of words in TCs’ responses. Subsequently, the codes were grouped into themes, finalized, and interpreted to draw conclusions (Gall et al., 2005 ). Thematic coding (Stake, 2020 ) was performed to provide an in-depth analysis of the responses of all participants, which was used later to calculate the frequency of responses in relation to each theme. This inductive process was used to analyze responses related to TCs’ prior preparation and challenges encountered. On the other hand, responses related to how TCs implemented DI were analyzed deductively according to the CPP-RIP framework explained earlier.

Results and Discussion

Tcs’ prior preparation.

Participants were asked about two specific documents to understand TCs’ prior exposure to important policy publications about EDI and DI issued by the Ministry of Education in Ontario. One out of 19 TCs indicated that they had read the Education Equity Plan ( 2017 ), while three out of 19 TCs indicated reading the Differentiated Instruction handbook (EduGains, 2010 ) and/or its accompanying online resources.

Furthermore, to explore TCs’ readiness and prior preparation, they were asked in the pre-survey to reflect on any PD they have had that would assist them to teach through an EDI lens in their classes and to evaluate the effectiveness of these PD opportunities. Out of 15 respondents, eight TCs stated specific coursework that included EDI-related topics such as Indigenous education, special and inclusive education, or/and STEM methods course in year 1 of the program. Five TCs noted that their year-1 practicum experience helped them explore EDI principles and applications. On the other hand, three TCs mentioned specific PD workshops related to the topic. Concerning the effectiveness of the above opportunities in helping them teach through an EDI lens in the future, ten TCs responded, with six of them agreeing that these opportunities were effective and four stating they were not. Out of the six TCs who indicated their experiences were effective, four mentioned the practicum to be specifically helpful. This finding highlights that TCs’ exploration of the concepts of EDI and DI mostly happens in a practical way in their practicum rather than in their courses or through additional PD. On the other hand, the four TCs who said that their experiences were not effective in helping them teach through an EDI lens pointed out that what they learned was irrelevant to their specific classes:

The strategies I learned for differentiated instruction were largely inapplicable to my most recent practicum, or at least I was ill-prepared for translating them to an online environment. (Gabe, Pre-survey) It would be more effective to see them (the strategies) in action in real life. (Jan, Pre-survey) The reasons for this (ineffectiveness) were the “busy work” associated with the special education course and the emphasis on elementary education. I am a high school teacher candidate. (Roy, Pre-survey)

Teacher candidates' responses on the interview at the end of the study corroborated these pre-survey findings. All six interviewees stated that they had experienced a form of DI in their coursework and/or teaching prior to the STEM curriculum and pedagogy course. Five of them mentioned taking courses related to DI (two of which mentioned special education courses), while four TCs said they had experienced DI in their practicum. Yet, five of the interviewees indicated that this exposure to DI was not quite effective. For instance, Roy said:

Before, I had the first practicum experience. And I did not add actually as much differentiated instruction. I had some that I implemented being like, just introductions of like videos for English language learner students, in addition to other course content but that was mainly guided by my associate teacher rather than it was my own. Some of the courses touched on it. We had a course on special education, touch on differentiation... We also had an Indigenous education course which touched on it briefly, although like in all of them it’s not super super in depth I believe in the ways you do it, it’s more just, we learned like what it is, to look at how we could apply it… (Roy, Interview)

These findings illustrate that TCs had varying levels of exposure to DI principles in some of their courses and their practicum experiences. Yet, the effectiveness of these opportunities is debatable. As argued by some TCs, the previous courses did not provide STEM-specific and high school–specific skills. Moreover, the emphasis on DI in mostly special education courses reinforces teachers’ misconception that implementing inclusive practices such as DI is only for students with exceptionalities (DiPirro, 2017 ; Whitley et al., 2019 ). This notion defeats the goal of integrating DI under all circumstances. On the other hand, practicum experiences, referred to by the majority of TCs, are related to the environment of specific schools and the efforts of specific mentoring teachers, and hence are not consistent among all TCs. Finally, most TCs have not read the Ministry published documents which suggests that programs need to work on this aspect as the documents are designed for the context of Ontario schools. The lack of engagement of TCs with the documents also reflects a gap between policy and practice. Overall, the preparation of TCs for DI requires improvement so that they consistently acquire specific knowledge and skills that enable them to utilize DI principles and strategies in teaching STEM subjects in Ontario classrooms.

These results also reiterate to a certain extent D’Intino and Wang’s ( 2021 ) findings from the theoretical analysis of the coursework offered in Canadian universities, indicating that the current coursework is not sufficient to prepare TCs for DI. Findings also corroborate Massouti’s ( 2019 , 2021 ), Rezai-Rashti and Solomon’s ( 2008 ), and Specht et al.’s ( 2016 ) conclusions related to the need for enhancing TCs’ preparation focusing on EDI practices in teacher education programs in Canada. Moreover, the fact that the majority of TCs were referring to DI based on their practicum experience highlights the importance of practical fieldwork and calls for further coherence between coursework and the practicum (Dack, 2019 ; Massouti, 2019 ).

TCs’ Reflection on their DI Implementation

In the post-survey, TCs reflected on their implementation of DI in the course tasks. Figure  2 shows the percentages of TCs who agreed or disagreed with various statements regarding their DI implementation. Most TCs agreed that their DI implementation was extensive (13 out of 17 TCs). The vast majority of the TCs indicated that they (1) differentiated the content (15 out of 17 TCs) by offering choices, extending the knowledge of advanced learners, providing support to students with difficulty, presenting the content at varying levels of complexity, reflecting students’ interests, eliminating curricular material for some students, and adjusting the pacing of instruction; (2) differentiated the process (15 out of 17 TCs) by offering multiple modes of learning, varying the instructional strategies, using flexible grouping, using independent study, and using interest centers; and (3) differentiated the product (16 out of 17 TCs) by varying the types of assessments, providing students with choices to express their understanding, providing tiered assignments, and utilizing rubrics that match varied ability levels.

TCs’ post-survey responses on DI implementation in the course ( n  = 17)

Most TCs agreed that they allow students to play a role in designing/selecting their learning activities (14 out of 17 TCs) and assessing their own learning (13 out of 17 TCs). The majority of TCs agreed that they use diagnostic assessment (14 out of 17 TCs), formative assessment (16 out of 17 TCs), and summative assessment (16 out of 17 TCs); and that these assessments inform subsequent teaching (all 17 TCs). Fifteen out of 17 TCs stated that they evaluate the effectiveness of their teaching adjustments, while 14 of them stated that they evaluate students based on their improvement and growth during the semester with respect to their initial academic levels. Finally, on the use of technology, 16 out of 17 TCs stated that they use technology as a tool for DI, and 14 out of 17 TCs stated that they use technology for assessment in DI specifically. Overall, the results show high levels of TCs’ implementation of DI in all aspects. This finding highlights the positive impact of the course on TCs' pedagogical skills related to DI, and hence an adequate preparation of teachers to implement EDI principles in their future classes. These findings parallel the literature on the importance and positive impact of teacher training on DI understanding and implementation for both pre-service and in-service teachers (Dixon et al., 2014 ; Goodnough, 2010 ; Nicolae, 2014 ; Pincince, 2016 ).

To investigate further, results of the Spearman correlation test indicate the relationship between TCs’ level of DI understanding and their implementation in the course work. For example, the post-survey results indicate a significant positive correlation between TCs’ familiarity with at least three methods to differentiate the content and their implementation of at least three methods of content differentiation in their course work (rs = 0.62, p  = 0.009). Additionally, results of the Spearman correlation indicate a significant positive correlation between TCs’ familiarity with at least three methods to differentiate the process and their implementation of at least three methods to differentiate the process in their course work (rs = 0.69, p  = 0.002). Similarly, results of the Spearman correlation indicate a significant positive correlation between TCs’ familiarity with at least three methods to differentiate the product and their implementation of at least three methods to differentiate the product in their course work (rs = 0.72, p  = 0.001). These findings reiterate the positive correlation between TCs’ understanding of DI and its implementation (DiPirro, 2017 ; Suprayogi et al., 2017 ; Whitley et al., 2019 ).

TCs’ Incorporation of DI Strategies in Their Coursework

Teacher candidates described in the interview how they differentiated instruction in their course work. TCs elaborated on how they differentiated the content, the process, and the product. TCs also discussed how they attended to EDI aspects especially respecting diverse cultural backgrounds, genders, and non-Western views. Furthermore, in the post-survey TCs indicated which assignment(s) in the course was/were the most relevant for differentiating instruction—nine out of 13 TCs selected the curriculum resources websites, four TCs stated the case studies, and two specified the DVGs. One TC, Erin, said it was all three assignments:

Every lesson and assignment created is relevant to differentiate instruction. I achieved through offering choices, extending knowledge of advanced learners, providing supplemental support, reflecting student’s interests, etc. (Interview)

Teacher candidates described their ability to develop resources that are inclusive of DI strategies and reflected positively on the various tasks:

Case Studies

In the first assignment, TCs developed curriculum by creating case studies of SSI (Fig.  3 ). TCs demonstrated proficient integration of DI principles, with TCs differentiating the process most, followed by the product of learning yet showing a need for more training in content differentiation in order to attend to students’ needs, backgrounds, and academic levels.

Sample cover page of a case study about hydroelectricity

In the interview, TCs explained how they developed case studies, taking different perspectives on the SSI into consideration, how they prepared materials with varied difficulty and readability levels, and how their lesson plans included multimodal teaching strategies. TCs said:

I made sure to incorporate lots of different levels of readings for my students so if I was assigning an article, I made sure that I checked out what reading level that article was and gave different levels and different options. And I also included a lot of different perspectives. And, like, we looked at issues on different scales so not just local, but also on a global scale. So, that was good! (Erin, Interview) We tried to do it (the case study) through different modes of learning and assessment. We used like a forum, kind of setting for our assessment where students would talk to each other, and they’d like exchange ideas. Specifically, always tried to use different methods of teaching, not just like direct instruction but also a collaborative group work, think pair share, stuff just different ways for students to augment their understanding. (Michael, Interview)

On the relevance of case studies for differentiating instruction, TCs said:

The case study was the most relevant to me for differentiated instruction. The various ways to conduct research (KWL, Cornell framework, consequence map, etc.) are all useful tools that can benefit different learners and providing students with these resources can assist them in conducting research in ways that work for them. (Gabe, Post-survey) I believe the case study assignment was the most relevant to differentiate instruction. We did this through offering multiple ways for students to engage with the content and complete their assignments. (Roy, Post-survey)

Digital Video Games (DVGs)

TCs developed DVGs with a simultaneous focus on DI and technology-enriched resources (Fig. 4 ). In differentiating the content, DVGs included increasing levels of difficulty highlighting scaffolding and varied pacing based on students’ readiness levels. In terms of process differentiation, the DVGs included multimodal representations; yet they are to be combined with other teaching strategies to ensure adequate differentiation. In terms of product differentiation, DVGs offered the room for diagnostic assessment before the game commences through guided questions as well as formative assessments and feedback throughout the levels. Additionally, the DVG offered space to represent various students’ backgrounds, genders, and physical abilities through avatars incorporated in the game.

Sample DVG focusing on physics concepts—projectile movement

In the interviews, TCs explained how their DVGs were culturally relevant, and how their avatars were inclusive in nature. Moreover, they explained how the levels included in the game were suitable for addressing students’ varying academic achievement levels. TCs said:

I had concepts outlined in different ways and had students use the visual stimulus from the pictures on the periodic table. But not just differentiated instruction, I also had diversity and equity through descriptions of elements in the periodic table. I had the related cultural backgrounds in there. (Roy, Interview) I incorporated like a more universal approach by giving students the options to like to choose their avatars, and the gender of their avatar. (Erin, Interview) There are different settings for video game for different capabilities of students depending on where their levels were. (Michael, Interview)

On the relevance of DVGs, Robert said:

DVG (was the most relevant to DI due to its) differing levels of difficulty. (Post-survey)

Curriculum Resources Websites

In the curriculum resources’ websites (Fig.  5 ), TCs showed adequate to high inclusion of DI principles and strategies utilizing a wide array of creative tools. TCs’ work demonstrate that they were able to prepare lessons and compile numerous resources while integrating a DI framework. TCs addressed common student misconceptions, acknowledged students’ prior knowledge, utilized a wide variety of multimodal teaching strategies, and included various forms of diagnostic, formative, and summative assessment methods. TCs addressed student differences in academic achievement levels, interests, cultural backgrounds, SES, linguistic abilities, and special needs. TCs were also capable of linking their science topics to equity matters and social justice issues by highlighting real-life-related scenarios. In agreement with the analysis of their course work, the majority of TCs stated in the post-survey that the curriculum resources’ website assignment was the most relevant to differentiate instruction when compared to other assignments.

Sample of a STEM curriculum website content page

TCs explained in the interviews how they created new digital resources and amalgamated available materials, while taking DI into consideration. Their resources are multimodal, reflect students’ cultural diversity, cater for different academic and linguistic levels, and integrate technology effectively. TCs said:

I just included research from different countries, so we’re not just focusing on North America, but we also talked about research focusing on Asia and also focusing on Europe. I also included resources where females are talking about their experiences in STEM or their experience in the field. For the lesson plans, students research about different cultures and countries in term of medicine, technology… I tried to reflect just not just the North American view. (Pam, Interview) For those resources, I just made sure like I had good lots of options to my students like I incorporated something called a RAFT project so students could choose the role and the audience, and the format, that kind of thing for all their assignments that they were submitting, And I also made sure that I was delivering the content in different ways. So, like I said before I was making sure I just had a PowerPoint but, in this case, I had different ways to show the learning through like live demos or incorporating technology like Ozobot. So, they had multiple ways to join the classroom learning. (Erin, Interview) I did like a whole bunch of assessments that were differentiated, not just tests but also interesting assignments so fairly open ended that allowed students to showcase how they learned in a way that was comfortable for them, and also teaching in ways that weren’t just the direct instruction with using videos and demonstrations and group activities. (Michael, Interview)

On the relevance of the STEM curriculum websites, TCs said:

The curriculum resource assignment was the most relevant. I made sure to include a variety of instructional modalities, teaching strategies, and active learning strategies in my lesson plans. I made sure to incorporate EDI into my lessons, accommodate for different learning styles, as well as providing visual support in lesson materials. (Holly, Post-survey) For me, it is the curriculum resource website. Because it integrates all the DI through the whole package, that is, initiatives, motivations, lesson plans, activities and assessments. (Nellie, Post-survey) Curriculum resource website- developing resources and lessons lends itself to differentiated instruction more easily than specific tasks. (Jim, Post-survey) Curriculum resources website- accumulating a variety of resources that can be used to achieve different goals and support UDL/DI in the classroom. (Elizabeth, Post-survey) Curriculum resources website- because we could create our own lesson plans incorporating differentiated instruction, there was more freedom than the other two projects. (Karen, Post-survey)

Challenges Faced by TCs: the Noted Progress

In the pre-survey, several themes emerged from TCs’ responses on perceived challenges that may hinder their DI implementation. Out of 17 TCs, eight mentioned time needed for preparation; seven mentioned challenges related to resources; seven mentioned admin-related reasons such as support, funding, class size, and PD; five mentioned student factors such as engagement and interest or special needs; four TCs stated teacher knowledge or skills; three mentioned online teaching during the pandemic; and one mentioned curriculum mandates.

In the post-survey, TCs reflected on the challenges they faced while trying to implement DI in their course assignments. Two main themes emerged as challenges from eight TCs’ responses: (1) specific content knowledge or skills related to an assignment (mentioned by five TCs) and (2) unknown students in the case of course assignments or having too many differences to account for in one classroom (mentioned by four TCs). With respect to the specific content knowledge and specific task skills, TCs said:

Some topics lend themselves better to EDI principles whereas others are heavily rooted in science and minute processes (e.g., metabolic processes). (Meredith, Post-survey) It was very difficult to differentiate instruction within the DVG assignment, as it required a lot of external knowledge on how to do this effectively. (Roy, Post-survey) It was difficult in the DVG because we wanted to keep the game simple and still incorporate DI and EDI. (Karen, Post-survey)

Four TCs mentioned the challenge related to having too many differences to account for or in their case creating a course assignment for a hypothetical classroom where students are unknown. TCs said:

The challenge is to cater to everyone’s individual needs. Yes, there are things we can do to differentiate learning that benefits all students, but there will always be some students left unaccounted for, no matter what. (Erin, Post-survey) Difficult when you are not making it for a known group of students. You are unsure what to highlight and focus on for EDI. (Angela, Post-survey)

While the latter responses were written as a challenge, they actually represent a positive note. These statements reflect that TCs have shown appreciation and awareness of student differences, which is the core of DI principles. Finally, it is worth mentioning that in general the reported challenges are very specific in nature and are in contrast to those reported in the literature such as the lack of teachers’ knowledge or skills in DI, low teacher motivation, and lack of resources. The reported challenges are not profound so as to impact TCs’ implementation of DI.

Thus, when comparing TCs’ pre-course survey reflections about the expected challenges to those in the post-course survey, the previously emerging themes related to resource availability and TCs’ knowledge and skills implementing EDI strategies were not significant. The stated challenges at the end of the course revealed that resources and strategies provided in the course helped TCs surpass the perceived obstacle of preparing resources that reflect DI principles. This benefit is possibly due to the fact that TCs had gained practical experience creating such resources and advancing their pedagogical knowledge integrating DI strategies, which reiterates the effectiveness of the course in enhancing TCs’ DI conceptions and self-efficacy toward DI.

This research focuses on intermediate-senior STEM TCs’ teacher preparation emphasizing their implementation of DI in teacher education courses. TCs reflected on their improved ability to integrate DI practices in their STEM curriculum and pedagogy course assignments. This result highlights the positive impact of the course on their professional knowledge related to DI, and hence adequate preparation of teachers to implement DI in their future practices.

While some research studies show that novice teachers express less willingness to implement DI due to various challenges (Garrett, 2017 ; Rollins, 2010 ; Wertheim & Leyser, 2002 ), the STEM course with DI-focused elements highlights the importance of PD opportunities aimed at enhancing TCs’ implementation of DI. The STEM curriculum and pedagogy course adopted an intensive and explicit reflective approach in teaching about several elements, as well as DI through rounds of discussion, feedback on TCs’ course work, and scaffolded course tasks to ensure advancement in TCs’ understanding and skill mastery. The adopted strategies were rooted in socio-cultural learning theories and based on communities of practice through resource and expertise sharing. These results call for adopting similar training approaches in other courses in teacher education programs to ensure that DI principles and strategies are deeply understood and proficiently practiced by TCs. This finding is in accordance with research highlighting the importance of DI-focused training in teacher education programs on TCs’ understanding (Dack, 2018 ; Goodnough, 2010 ) and implementation of DI (Adlam, 2007 ; Wan, 2017 ).

Teacher candidates' coursework showed that they were able to design lesson plans and curriculum resources that are differentiated in content, process, and product, with higher proficiency in differentiating the process specifically. These results are reflected in the literature indicating that the content and product differentiation are less understood by teachers compared to the process (Rollins, 2010 ; Turner & Solis, 2017 ). It is important to note that the three assignments were helpful in different ways, which is also a scaffolding approach used by the TCs. TCs were trying different DI approaches in each assignment and choosing what was of particular relevance. For instance, the case studies enabled TCs to take diversity and different perspectives into consideration. DVGs are were of specific significance in differentiating the difficulty levels, scaffolding, and considering diversity and inclusion in race, gender, etc. On the other hand, the websites enabled TCs to apply all their acquired knowledge and skills about DI to create teaching and assessment resources. Both the wide variety and required depth of DI implementation in various course tasks ensured an adequate exposure of TCs to various forms of DI.

Finally, challenges encountered and anticipated by TCs are worth noting. When comparing TCs’ pre-course survey reflections about the expected challenges to those in the post-course survey, the previously identified themes related to resource availability and TCs’ knowledge and skills in implementing EDI strategies were not significant. In contrast to those reported in the literature such as the lack of teachers’ knowledge or skills in DI (Adlam, 2007 ), low teacher motivation (Garrett, 2017 ; Rollins, 2010 ; Wertheim & Leyser, 2002 ), and lack of resources (de Jager, 2017 ; Park & Datnow, 2017 ; Turner & Solis, 2017 ; Wan, 2017 ), the reported challenges do not reflect deep or profound obstacles that would impact TCs’ implementation of DI in the future. The stated challenges at the end of the course revealed that resources and strategies provided by the course helped TCs surpass the perceived obstacle of preparing resources that reflect DI principles.

Limitations

This study provides rich description of TCs’ DI implementation in the course from several data sources, thus ensuring data triangulation. Yet, the major limitation pertains to TCs’ implementation of DI in their practicum and future practices. Future research can further explore this aspect by observing TCs in their practicum to provide them with feedback and attain a more comprehensive understanding of their practices and DI implementation. Moreover, one of the major challenges encountered in this study was the COVID-19 pandemic which led to the 12-week course being offered online. This shift required all course activities to be conducted online, which may have affected TCs in terms of face-to-face collaborations and social engagement as they researched and developed assignments. Additionally, in general, the pandemic added a huge burden on TCs and can thus be perceived as a stressor that may have affected the quality of work that TCs produced. Finally, the unique nature of the STEM curriculum and pedagogy course, offered to specific TCs who are enrolled in the STEM specialty, may affect the extent to which one can generalize from the findings presented in this study.

Implications

This research addresses the most pressing challenges that hinder DI implementation as reported by teachers, such as availability of resources (Adlam, 2007 ; Griful-Freixenet et al., 2021 ; Paone, 2017 ), required time for lesson planning (Adlam, 2007 ; Brevik et al., 2018 ; Paone, 2017 ), and ability to plan for DI (Griful-Freixenet et al., 2021 ; Kendrick-Weikle, 2015 ; Rollins, 2010 ). Thus, the course has addressed an important need for training TCs to enhance their understanding and implementation of DI (Casey & Gable, 2012 ; Rollins, 2010 ). One major challenge that warrants further research is training in-service teachers and TCs on differentiating instruction in online environments, given online teaching is gaining traction post-COVID-19 pandemic.

This research informs teacher educators and curriculum designers about practical measures to include DI practices in teacher education courses. This implication is timely as most teacher education programs are currently striving to integrate equitable and inclusive pedagogies in their curriculum and overall planning. The study shows that EDI practices such as DI must and can be woven into all requirements of teacher education programs, rather than restricting those principles to inclusive education or special education courses only. The study also informs heads of departments, policy makers, and school administrators about the successes and challenges of similar PD initiatives, in the hopes that more of these PD programs are implemented with in-service teachers to revitalize their teaching practices.

Data Availability

Declarations.

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This research has acquired ethical approval from Western University Non-Medical Research Ethics Board (Project ID: 114831).

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 37 (10), 1057–1095. 10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C
• Adlam, E. (2007). Differentiated instruction in the elementary school: Investigating the knowledge elementary teachers posses when implementing differentiated instruction in their classrooms [PhD Thesis]. University of Windsor.
• Beasley JG, Beck DE. Defining differentiation in cyber schools: What online teachers say. TechTrends. 2017; 61 (6):550–559. doi: 10.1007/s11528-017-0189-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Birnie BF. A teacher’s guide to successful classroom management and differentiated instruction. Rowman & Littlefield; 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blackburn, B. R. (2018). Rigor and differentiation in the classroom: Tools and strategies (1st ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781351185912
• Brantley-Dias L, Puvirajah A, Dias M. Supporting teacher candidates’ multidimensional reflection: A model and a protocol. Reflective Practice. 2021; 22 (2):187–202. doi: 10.1080/14623943.2020.1865904. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brevik LM, Gunnulfsen AE, Renzulli JS. Student teachers’ practice and experience with differentiated instruction for students with higher learning potential. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2018; 71 :34–45. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell C. Educational equity in Canada: The case of Ontario’s strategies and actions to advance excellence and equity for students. School Leadership & Management. 2021; 41 (4–5):409–428. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2019.1709165. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Casey, M. K., & Gable, R. K. (2012). Perceived efficacy of beginning teachers to differentiate instruction. 44th Annual Meeting of the New England Educational Research Association . http://scholarsarchive.jwu.edu/teacher_ed/7
• Chamberlin M, Powers R. The promise of differentiated instruction for enhancing the mathematical understandings of college students. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications. 2010; 29 (3):113–139. doi: 10.1093/teamat/hrq006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Connolly, P. (2007). Quantitative data analysis in education: A critical introduction using SPSS . Routledge.
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
• Dack H. Structuring teacher candidate learning about differentiated instruction through coursework. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2018; 69 :62–74. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.09.017. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dack H. The role of teacher preparation program coherence in supporting candidate appropriation of the pedagogical tools of differentiated instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2019; 78 :125–140. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2018.11.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Jager T. Perspectives of teachers on differentiated teaching in multi-cultural South African secondary schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 2017; 53 :115–121. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De Jesus, O. N. (2012). Differentiated instruction: Can differentiated instruction provide success for all learners? National Teacher Education Journal , 5 (3).
• DeCoito, I. (in press). STEMifying teacher education – A Canadian context. In A. M. Al-Balushi, L. Martin-Hansen, & Y. Song (Eds.), Reforming science teacher education programs in the STEM era: International practices . Springer.
• DeCoito I, Briona LK. Navigating theory and practice: Digital video games (DVGs) in STEM education. In: Akerson VL, Buck GA, editors. Critical Questions in STEM Education. Springer; 2020. pp. 85–104. [ Google Scholar ]
• DeCoito, I., & Estaiteyeh, M. (2022, May). Addressing STEM teachers’ challenges in online teaching by enhancing their TPACK and creating digital resources . Canadian Society for the Study of Education (CSSE) Conference, Virtual.
• DeCoito, I., & Fazio, X. (2017). Developing case studies in teacher education: Spotlighting socio-scientific issues. Innovations in Science Teacher Education , 2 (1).
• D’Intino, J. S., & Wang, L. (2021). Differentiated instruction: A review of teacher education practices for Canadian pre-service elementary school teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching , 1–14. 10.1080/02607476.2021.1951603
• DiPirro, J. (2017). Implementation of differentiated instruction: An analysis [PhD Thesis]. Rivier University.
• Dixon FA, Yssel N, McConnell JM, Hardin T. Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 2014; 37 (2):111–127. doi: 10.1177/0162353214529042. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• EduGains. (2010). Student success: Differentiated instruction educator’s package . http://www.edugains.ca/resourcesDI/EducatorsPackages/DIEducatorsPackage2010/2010EducatorsGuide.pdf
• Egbo, B. (2012). What should preservice teachers know about race and diversity? Exploring a critical knowledge-base for teaching in 21st century Canadian classrooms. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education , 6 (2). 10.20355/C5C30R
• Estaiteyeh, M., & DeCoito, I. (2023). Differentiated instruction in digital video games: STEM teacher candidates using technology to meet learners’ needs. Interactive Learning Environments . 10.1080/10494820.2023.2190360
• Farrell, T. S. C. (2015). Promoting teacher reflection in second-language education: A framework for TESOL professionals . Routledge.
• Gall, J. P., Gall, M. D., & Borg, W. R. (2005). Applying educational research: A practical guide (5th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
• Garrett, S. (2017). A comparative study between teachers’ self-efficacy of differentiated instruction and frequency differentiated instruction is implemented [PhD Thesis]. Northcentral University.
• Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
• George PS. A rationale for differentiating instruction in the regular classroom. Theory into Practice. 2005; 44 (3):185–193. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4403_2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodnough K. Investigating pre-service science teachers’ developing professional knowledge through the lens of differentiated instruction. Research in Science Education. 2010; 40 (2):239–265. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9120-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K., & Vantieghem, W. (2021). Exploring pre-service teachers’ beliefs and practices about two inclusive frameworks: Universal design for learning and differentiated instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education , 107 , 103503. 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103503
• Guay F, Roy A, Valois P. Teacher structure as a predictor of students’ perceived competence and autonomous motivation: The moderating role of differentiated instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2017; 87 (2):224–240. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12146. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hubball H, Collins J, Pratt D. Enhancing reflective teaching practices: Implications for faculty development programs. Canadian Journal of Higher Education. 2005; 35 (3):57–81. doi: 10.47678/cjhe.v35i3.183514. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kamarulzaman MH, Azman H, Zahidi AM. Research trend in the practice of differentiated instruction. The Journal of Social Sciences Research. 2018; 4 (12):648–668. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kendrick-Weikle, K. (2015). Illinois high school teachers’ understanding and use of differentiated instruction . Western Illinois University.
• Kizas A. Differentiated instruction and student engagement: Effective strategies for teaching combined-grade classes at the secondary level. Canadian Music Educator. 2016; 57 (2):33–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ladson-Billings G. Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal. 1995; 32 (3):465–491. doi: 10.2307/1163320. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the remix. Harvard Educational Review , 84 (1), 74–84. 10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
• Levy HM. Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House. 2008; 81 (4):161–164. doi: 10.3200/TCHS.81.4.161-164. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Madkins TC, Morton K. Disrupting anti-blackness with young learners in STEM: Strategies for elementary science and mathematics teacher education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education. 2021; 21 (2):239–256. doi: 10.1007/s42330-021-00159-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maeng J. Using technology to facilitate differentiated high school science instruction. Research in Science Education. 2017; 47 (5):1075–1099. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9546-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Malloy, J. (2019). Gaps are not closing. We need to make a bold move. School Administrator , 76 (1), 40–42.
• Manavathu M, Zhou G. The impact of differentiated instructional materials on English language learner (ELL) students’ comprehension of science laboratory tasks. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education. 2012; 12 (4):334–349. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2012.732255. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Massouti, A. (2019). Inclusion and policy enactment in teacher education: A focus on pre-service teacher preparation for the inclusive classroom [PhD Thesis]. The University of Western Ontario.
• Massouti A. Pre-service teachers’ perspectives on their preparation for inclusive teaching: Implications for organizational change in teacher education. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2021; 12 (1):n1. doi: 10.5206/cjsotlrcacea.2021.1.10611. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McGhie-Richmond D, Underwood K, Jordan A. Developing effective instructional strategies for teaching in inclusive classrooms. Exceptionality Education Canada. 2007; 17 (1):27–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mitchell, L., & Hobson, B. (2005). One size does not fit all: Differentiation in the elementary grades . Beaverton School District Summer Institute, Beaverton, OR.
• Moldoveanu, M., Grenier, N., & Marca-Vadan, L. (2016). Professional profile of primary teachers in disadvantaged and Indigenous communities who use differentiated practices . 7302–7302. 10.21125/edulearn.2016.0593
• Mujawamariya D, Hujaleh F, Lima-Kerckhoff A. A reexamination of Ontario’s science curriculum: Toward a more inclusive multicultural science education? Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education. 2014; 14 (3):269–283. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2014.874618. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niccum-Johnson, M. A. (2018). An investigation of the consistency of use of differentiated instruction in upper elementary classrooms [PhD Thesis]. McKendree University.
• Nicolae M. Teachers’ beliefs as the differentiated instruction starting point: Research basis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 128 :426–431. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.182. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ontario Ministry of Education. (2017). Ontario’s education equity action plan . https://files.ontario.ca/edu-1_0/edu-Ontario-Education-Equity-Action-Plan-en-2021-08-04.pdf
• Paone, N. A. (2017). Middle school teachers’ perceptions of differentiated instruction: A case study [PhD Thesis]. Northcentral University.
• Paré, M., & Prud’homme, L. (Eds.). (2014). La différenciation dans une perspective inclusive: Intégrer les connaissances issues de la recherche pour favoriser la progression des élèves dans un groupe hétérogène. Revue suisse de pédagogie spécialisée . https://edudoc.ch/record/113215?ln=de
• Park V, Datnow A. Ability grouping and differentiated instruction in an era of data-driven decision making. American Journal of Education. 2017; 123 (2):281–306. doi: 10.1086/689930. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pincince, D. L. (2016). Participation in professional development and its role in the implementation of differentiated instruction in the middle school . Northeastern University.
• Pollard, A., & Tann, S. (1997). Reflective teaching in the primary school: A handbook for the classroom . Cassell London.
• Prud’Homme, L. (2007). La différenciation pédagogique: Analyse du sens construit par des enseignantes et un chercheur-formateur dans un contexte de recherche-action-formation . Université du Québec à Montréal.
• Rezai-Rashti, G., Segeren, A., & Martino, W. (2015). Race and racial justice in Ontario education: Neoliberalism and strategies of racial invisibility. In Building democracy through education on diversity (pp. 141–158). Brill Sense.
• Rezai-Rashti G, Segeren A, Martino W. The new articulation of equity education in neoliberal times: The changing conception of social justice in Ontario. Globalisation, Societies and Education. 2017; 15 (2):160–174. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2016.1169514. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rezai-Rashti, G., & Solomon, P. (2008). Teacher candidates’ racial identity formation and the possibilities of antiracism in teacher education. In Comparative and global pedagogies: Equity, access and democracy in education (Vol. 2, pp. 167–188). Springer.
• Robinson, Q. E. (2017). Perceptions and adoption of differentiated instruction by elementary teachers [PhD Thesis]. Capella University.
• Rollins, R. (2010). Assessing the understanding and use of differentiated instruction: A comparison of novice and experienced technology education teachers . North Carolina State University.
• Roy A, Guay F, Valois P. Teaching to address diverse learning needs: Development and validation of a differentiated instruction scale. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2013; 17 (11):1186–1204. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2012.743604. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Santangelo T, Tomlinson CA. Teacher educators’ perceptions and use of differentiated instruction practices: An exploratory investigation. Action in Teacher Education. 2012; 34 (4):309–327. doi: 10.1080/01626620.2012.717032. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Specht J, McGhie-Richmond D, Loreman T, Mirenda P, Bennett S, Gallagher T, Young G, Metsala J, Aylward L, Katz J, Lyons W, Thompson S, Cloutier S. Teaching in inclusive classrooms: Efficacy and beliefs of Canadian preservice teachers. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2016; 20 (1):1–15. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2015.1059501. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stake, R. (2020). Case studies. In Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435–454). Sage.
• Statistics Canada. (2017). Immigration and ethnocultural diversity: Key results from the 2016 Census . https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025b-eng.pdf?st=qmWvzclz
• Statistics Canada. (2022). Immigrants make up the largest share of the population in over 150 years and continue to shape who we are as Canadians . https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/221026/dq221026a-eng.htm
• Suprayogi MN, Valcke M, Godwin R. Teachers and their implementation of differentiated instruction in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2017; 67 :291–301. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.020. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor, S. L. (2018). Educating 21st century learners: A phenomenological study of middle school teachers’ understanding and use of differentiated instruction [PhD Thesis]. Northcentral University.
• Tobin, R. (2007). Differentiating in the language arts: Flexible options to support all students. Canadian Children , 32 (2).
• Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (1st ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
• Tomlinson CA, Brighton C, Hertberg H, Callahan CM, Moon TR, Brimijoin K, Conover LA, Reynolds T. Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 2003; 27 (2–3):119–145. doi: 10.1177/016235320302700203. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom . ASCD.
• Turner WD, Solis OJ. The misnomers of differentiating instruction in large classes. Journal of Effective Teaching. 2017; 17 (3):64–76. [ Google Scholar ]
• Valiandes S, Tarman B. Differentiated teaching and constructive learning approach by the implementation of ICT in mixed ability classrooms. Ahi Evran University Journal of Education Faculty (KEFAD) 2011; 12 :169–184. [ Google Scholar ]
• van Geel M, Keuning T, Frèrejean J, Dolmans D, van Merriënboer J, Visscher AJ. Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 2019; 30 (1):51–67. doi: 10.1080/09243453.2018.1539013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wan SW-Y. Differentiated instruction: Hong Kong prospective teachers’ teaching efficacy and beliefs. Teachers and Teaching. 2016; 22 (2):148–176. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2015.1055435. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wan SW-Y. Differentiated instruction: Are Hong Kong in-service teachers ready? Teachers and Teaching. 2017; 23 (3):284–311. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2016.1204289. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watts-Taffe S, (Barbara) Laster, B. P., Broach, L., Marinak, B., McDonald Connor, C., & Walker-Dalhouse, D. Differentiated instruction: Making informed teacher decisions. The Reading Teacher. 2012; 66 (4):303–314. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.01126. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wertheim C, Leyser Y. Efficacy beliefs, background variables, and differentiated instruction of Israeli prospective teachers. The Journal of Educational Research. 2002; 96 (1):54–63. doi: 10.1080/00220670209598791. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitley J, Gooderham S, Duquette C, Orders S, Cousins JB. Implementing differentiated instruction: A mixed-methods exploration of teacher beliefs and practices. Teachers and Teaching. 2019; 25 (8):1043–1061. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2019.1699782. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willis S, Mann L. Differentiating instruction: Finding manageable ways to meet individual needs. Curriculum Update. 2000; 4 :1–3. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE.

The Impact of Differentiated Instruction on Students’ Reading Comprehension Attainment in Mixed-Ability Classrooms

• Published: 17 April 2021
• Volume 52 , pages 255–272, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Ibrahim Suleiman Ibrahim Magableh   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5983-7145 1 &
• Amelia Abdullah   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4055-699X 2  

3152 Accesses

5 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This explanatory sequential quasi-experimental study investigated the impact of differentiated instruction on reading comprehension attainment in mixed-ability classrooms. Fifty-four tenth grade students from two classes in two different schools took part in the study. They were randomly distributed into an experimental group (n = 27) and control group n = (27). The experimental group was taught reading comprehension following differentiated instruction strategies of homogeneous grouping, tiered assignment and tiered instruction in the areas of content, process and product. The experimental group was supported with modified reading comprehension texts from Action Pack 10, supplementary materials and leveled short stories. The control group was taught in the one-size-fits-all method using Action Pack 10th text books only. The study is a mixed-method design where quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data. The main objective was to investigate the effect of differentiated instruction on secondary stage. The researchers used the pre-test/post-test scores to collect the quantitative data followed by a student semi-structured interview after the experiment. T-test results revealed that differentiated instruction was effective in increasing reading comprehension achievement for the early secondary stage. The experimental group outperformed their counterparts in the control group.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Meta-analyses of the effects of tier 2 type reading interventions in grades k-3.

Jeanne Wanzek, Sharon Vaughn, … Philip Capin

The impact of tier 1 reading instruction on reading outcomes for students in Grades 4–12: A meta-analysis

Elizabeth Swanson, Elizabeth A. Stevens, … Christy R. Austin

The Effectiveness of Pre-assessment to Differentiate the Reading Tasks for the Mixed-Abilities EFL Learners

Aftab, J. (2015). Teachers' beliefs about differentiated instructions in mixed-ability classrooms: A case of time limitation. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 2 (2), 94–114.

Article   Google Scholar  

Aliakbari, M., & Haghighi, J. (2014). Impact of differentiated instruction strategies and traditional-based instruction on the reading comprehension of Iranian EFL students. Research in Applied Linguistics, 5 (1), 109–129.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete). New York: Longman.

Anstee, P. (2014). Differentiation: Pocketbook . Hampshire, UK: Teacher’s Pocketbooks.

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive Domain (pp. 20–24). New York: McKay.

Bondie, R. S., Dahnke, C., & Zusho, A. (2019). How does changing “one-size-fits-all” to differentiated instruction affect teaching? Review of Research in Education, 43 (1), 336–362. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821130 .

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research . Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books/about/Educational_Research.html?id=4PywcQAACAAJ

Dawson, P., & Guare, R. (2018). Executive skills in children and adolescents. A practical guide to assessment and intervention . Guilford Publications.

De Graaf, A., Westbroek, H., & Janssen, F. (2019). A practical approach to differentiated instruction: How biology teachers redesigned their genetics and ecology lessons. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30 (1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560x.2018.1523646 .

Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37 (2), 111–127.

Firwana, S. S. (2017). The Effect of Differentiated Instruction on Learning English Vocabulary and Grammar among Second Graders in UNRWA Schools (Doctoral dissertation, The Islamic University–Gaza).

Förster, N., Kawohl, E., & Souvignier, E. (2018). Short-and long-term effects of assessment-based differentiated reading instruction in general education on reading fluency and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 56 , 98–109.

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic books . https://doi.org/10.2307/3332707 .

Gardner, H. (2018). Multiple approaches to understanding. Contemporary Theories of Learning (pp. 129–138). London: Routledge.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Garg, H., & Rani, D. (2019). A robust correlation coefficient measure of complex intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their applications in decision-making. Applied Intelligence, 49 (2), 496–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-018-1290-3 .

Hawkins, J., Jones, S. J., & Santi, K. L. (2019). Diverse ability levels: Differentiating instruction to teach to all learners. Empathic Teaching: Promoting Social Justice in the Contemporary Classroom . https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2002.11494669 .

Ismail, S. A. A., & Al Allaq, K. (2019). The nature of cooperative learning and differentiated instruction practices in English classes. SAGE Open, 9 (2), 2158244019856450. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019856450 .

Infante, P., & Poehner, M. (2019). Realizing the ZPD in second language education. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 6 (1), 63–91. https://doi.org/10.1558/lst.38916 .

Jefferson, R. E., Grant, C. E., & Sander, J. B. (2017). Effects of tier I differentiation and reading intervention on reading fluency, comprehension, and high stakes measures. Reading Psychology, 38 (1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2016.1235648 .

Jentoft, N., & Olsen, T. S. (2019). Against the flow in data collection: How data triangulation combined with a ‘slow interview technique enriches data. Qualitative Social Work, 18 (2), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325017712581 .

Jones, E. (2017). One size fits all? Multiple intelligences and legal education. The Law Teacher, 51 (1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2015.1082238 .

Kotob, M. M., & Abadi, M. A. (2019). The influence of differentiated instruction on academic achievement of students in mixed ability classrooms. International Linguistics Research, 2 (2), 8-p8. https://doi.org/10.30560/ilr.v2n2p8 .

Leblebicier, (2020). Learning Through Differentiated Instruction: Action Research in an Academic Class (Doctoral dissertation. Middle East Technical University).

Levy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House, 81 (4), 161–164. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.81.4.161-164 .

Magableh, I., & Abdullah, A. (2019). The effect of differentiated instruction on developing students’ reading comprehension achievement. International Journal of Management and Applied Science (IJMAS), 5 (2), 48–53.

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. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13237a .

Mooney, C. (2000). Theories of Childhood: An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, & Vygotsky . St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.

Morgan, H. (2014). Maximizing student success with differentiated learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 87 (1), 34–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2013.832130 .

Saundersová, R. (2014). Differentiation in Primary School ELT . Diploma Thesis. Masaryk University.

Sebihi, A. (2016). Strategizing teaching: Differentiated teaching style and learning brain. EPRA, 4 (12), 115–118.

Siam, K., & Al-Natour, M. (2016). Teacher’s differentiated instruction practices and implementation. International Education Studies, 9 (12), 167. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n12p167 .

Stronge, J. H. (2018). Qualities of Effective Teachers . Alexandra, VI: ASCD.

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7 (7), 935–947.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the Promise of the Differentiated Classroom: Strategies and Tools for Responsive Teaching . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of all Learners . Alexandra, VI: ASCD.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2015). Teaching for excellence in academically diverse classrooms. Society, 52 (3), 203–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-015-9888-0 .

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to Differentiate Instruction in Academically Diverse Classrooms . Alexandra, VI: ASCD.

Tomlinson, C., & Imbeau, M. (2010). Leading and Managing a Differentiated Classroom . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tompkin, G. (2014). Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach . Oxford: Pearson.

Valiandes, S., & Neophytou, L. (2018). Teachers’ professional development for differentiated instruction in mixed-ability classrooms: Investigating the impact of a development program on teachers’ professional learning and on students’ achievement. Teacher Development, 22 (1), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2017.1338196 .

Viera, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The Kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37 (5), 360–363.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Weselby, C. (2014). What is Differentiated Instruction? Examples of How to Differentiate Instruction in the Classroom . Retrieved from January 20, 2018.

Westwood, P. (2018). Inclusive and Adaptive Teaching: Meeting the Challenge of Diversity in the Classroom . London: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Wilcox, R. (2019). A robust nonparametric measure of effect size based on an analog of Cohen’s d, plus inferences about the median of the typical difference. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 17 (2), 1. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1551905677 .

Williams, S. (2019). The Influence of Differentiation on Student Behavior and Achievement (Doctoral dissertation).‏ Milligan College.

Yousefi, E., & Bonyadi, A. (2016). The effect of differentiated instruction reading comprehension of Iranian rural EFL Learners. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 6 (1), 927–935.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The researchers would like to thank the board of education and the teachers involved for their support during the research.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

TESOL Education, USM University – Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia

Ibrahim Suleiman Ibrahim Magableh

USM Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia

Amelia Abdullah

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by both authors. The first draft of the manuscript was written by IM and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ibrahim Suleiman Ibrahim Magableh .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests.

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Magableh, I.S.I., Abdullah, A. The Impact of Differentiated Instruction on Students’ Reading Comprehension Attainment in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Interchange 52 , 255–272 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-021-09427-3

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2020

Accepted : 09 February 2021

Published : 17 April 2021

Issue Date : June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-021-09427-3

Share this article

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

• Differentiated instruction
• Differentiation
• Reading comprehension
• One-size-fits-all
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Main Navigation

• Accept offer and enrol
• Current Students

Personalise your experience

Did you mean..., diploma of arts and social sciences, art/science collaboration wins waterhouse natural science art prize, unit of study educ3023 inclusive and special education: the responsive teacher (2025).

Future students: T: 1800 626 481 E: Email your enquiry here

Current students: Contact: Faculty of Education

Students studying at an education collaboration: Please contact your relevant institution

updated - DO NOT REMOVE THIS LINE 6:05 AM on Fri, 12 April

Show me unit information for year

Unit snapshot.

UG Coursework Unit

Credit points

Faculty & college.

Faculty of Education

Pre-requisites

96 Credit points in a Bachelor of Education course.

Anti-requisites

EDUC2009 - Supporting Learners with Diverse Abilities

Enrolment information

Bachelor of Education students must complete all first year units (96 CP) prior to enrolling in this unit to meet NESA Accreditation requirements.

Unit description

Uses case studies, contemporary research and practical examples to introduce inclusive education for students with disabilities and other additional learning needs. Explores theories and practical applications of teaching students with disability in inclusive and special education classrooms, with a focus on interactions between legislation and policy, differentiation and learning adjustments, communication, collaboration, community consultation and professional leadership. Students demonstrate and apply knowledge of inclusive teaching strategies for learners with a disability or other additional learning needs.    

Unit content

Availabilities, learning outcomes.

Unit Learning Outcomes express learning achievement in terms of what a student should know, understand and be able to do on completion of a unit. These outcomes are aligned with the graduate attributes . The unit learning outcomes and graduate attributes are also the basis of evaluating prior learning.

On completion of this unit, students should be able to:

demonstrate written and oral synthesis of their understanding of the needs of students with a disability whilst evaluating what adjustments may be applied to ensure access and full participation in curriculum and learning opportunities, including to feel a sense of belonging in the school community, on the same basis as other students.

demonstrate broad knowledge and understanding of legislative requirements and teaching strategies that support inclusion, participation and engagement in classroom and school activities for students with a disability

demonstrate knowledge and understanding of a range of teaching strategies including differentiation and providing reasonable adjustments to meet the specific learning needs of students with a disability or other special learning and support needs

demonstrate skills in working collaboratively with other professionals, including learning support teachers, special education staff, teacher assistants, specialist and advisory teachers, external professionals and community representatives; also in consulting and collaborating with parents/ carers and community.

Teaching and assessment

Coffs harbour (term), gold coast (term), online (term), prescribed learning resources.

• Prescribed text information is not currently available.
• Prescribed resources/equipment information is not currently available.

Prescribed Learning Resources may change in future Teaching Periods.

Fee information

Commonwealth Supported courses For information regarding Student Contribution Amounts please visit the Student Contribution Amounts .

Fee paying courses For postgraduate or undergraduate full-fee paying courses please check Domestic Postgraduate Fees OR Domestic Undergraduate Fees .

International

Please check the international course and fee list to determine the relevant fees.

Courses that offer this unit

Bachelor of education (2024), bachelor of education (2025), bachelor of early childhood education (2025), bachelor of early childhood education (2024), any questions we'd love to help.

• See us on facebook
• See us on twitter
• See us on youtube
• See us on linkedin
• See us on instagram

AI improves accuracy of skin cancer diagnoses in Stanford Medicine-led study

Artificial intelligence algorithms powered by deep learning improve skin cancer diagnostic accuracy for doctors, nurse practitioners and medical students in a study led by the Stanford Center for Digital Health.

April 11, 2024 - By Krista Conger

Artificial intelligence helped clinicians diagnose skin cancer more accurately, a Stanford Medicine-led study found. Chanelle Malambo/peopleimages.com   -  stock.adobe.com

A new study led by researchers at Stanford Medicine finds that computer algorithms powered by artificial intelligence based on deep learning can help health care practitioners to diagnose skin cancers more accurately. Even dermatologists benefit from AI guidance, although their improvement is less than that seen for non-dermatologists.

“This is a clear demonstration of how AI can be used in collaboration with a physician to improve patient care,” said professor of dermatology and of epidemiology Eleni Linos , MD. Linos leads the Stanford Center for Digital Health , which was launched to tackle some of the most pressing research questions at the intersection of technology and health by promoting collaboration between engineering, computer science, medicine and the humanities.

Linos, associate dean of research and the Ben Davenport and Lucy Zhang Professor in Medicine, is the senior author of the study , which was published on April 9 in npj Digital Medicine . Postdoctoral scholar Jiyeong Kim , PhD, and visiting researcher Isabelle Krakowski, MD, are the lead authors of the research.

“Previous studies have focused on how AI performs when compared with physicians,” Kim said. “Our study compared physicians working without AI assistance with physicians using AI when diagnosing skin cancers.”

AI algorithms are increasingly used in clinical settings, including dermatology. They are created by feeding a computer hundreds of thousands or even millions of images of skin conditions labeled with information such as diagnosis and patient outcome. Through a process called deep learning, the computer eventually learns to recognize telltale patterns in the images that correlate with specific skin diseases including cancers. Once trained, an algorithm written by the computer can be used to suggest possible diagnoses based on an image of a patient’s skin that it has not been exposed to.

Eleni Linos

These diagnostic algorithms aren’t used alone, however. They are overseen by clinicians who also assess the patient, come to their own conclusions about a patient’s diagnosis and choose whether to accept the algorithm’s suggestion.

An accuracy boost

Kim and Linos’ team reviewed 12 studies detailing more than 67,000 evaluations of potential skin cancers by a variety of practitioners with and without AI assistance. They found that, overall, health care practitioners working without aid from artificial intelligence were able to accurately diagnose about 75% of people with skin cancer — a statistical measurement known as sensitivity. Conversely, the workers correctly diagnosed about 81.5% of people with cancer-like skin conditions but who did not have cancer — a companion measurement known as specificity.

Health care practitiones who used AI to guide their diagnoses did better. Their diagnoses were about 81.1% sensitive and 86.1% specific. The improvement may seem small, but the differences are critical for people told they don’t have cancer, but do, or for those who do have cancer but are told they are healthy.

When the researchers split the health care practitioners by specialty or level of training, they saw that medical students, nurse practitioners and primary care doctors benefited the most from AI guidance — improving on average about 13 points in sensitivity and 11 points in specificity. Dermatologists and dermatology residents performed better overall, but the sensitivity and specificity of their diagnoses also improved with AI.

“I was surprised to see everyone’s accuracy improve with AI assistance, regardless of their level of training,” Linos said. “This makes me very optimistic about the use of AI in clinical care. Soon our patients will not just be accepting, but expecting, that we use AI assistance to provide them with the best possible care.”

Jiyeong Kim

Researchers at the Stanford Center for Digital Health, including Kim, are interested in learning more about the promise of and barriers to integrating AI-based tools into health care. In particular, they are planning to investigate how the perceptions and attitudes of physicians and patients to AI will influence its implementation.

“We want to better understand how humans interact with and use AI to make clinical decisions,” Kim said. 

Previous studies have indicated that a clinician’s degree of confidence in their own clinical decision, the degree of confidence of the AI, and whether the clinician and the AI agree on the diagnosis all influence whether the clinician incorporates the algorithm’s advice when making clinical decisions for a patient.

Medical specialties like dermatology and radiology, which rely heavily on images — visual inspection, pictures, X-rays, MRIs and CT scans, among others — for diagnoses are low-hanging fruit for computers that can pick out levels of detail beyond what a human eye (or brain) can reasonably process. But even other more symptom-based specialties, or prediction modeling, are likely to benefit from AI intervention, Linos and Kim feel. And it’s not just patients who stand to benefit.

“If this technology can simultaneously improve a doctor’s diagnostic accuracy and save them time, it’s really a win-win. In addition to helping patients, it could help reduce physician burnout and improve the human interpersonal relationships between doctors and their patients,” Linos said. “I have no doubt that AI assistance will eventually be used in all medical specialties. The key question is how we make sure it is used in a way that helps all patients regardless of their background and simultaneously supports physician well-being.”

Researchers from the Karolinska Institute, the Karolinska University Hospital and the University of Nicosia contributed to the research.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (grants K24AR075060 and R01AR082109), Radiumhemmet Research, the Swedish Cancer Society and the Swedish Research Council.

For more news about responsible AI in health and medicine,  sign up  for the RAISE Health newsletter.

Register  for the RAISE Health Symposium on May 14.

About Stanford Medicine

Stanford Medicine is an integrated academic health system comprising the Stanford School of Medicine and adult and pediatric health care delivery systems. Together, they harness the full potential of biomedicine through collaborative research, education and clinical care for patients. For more information, please visit med.stanford.edu .

Artificial intelligence

Exploring ways AI is applied to health care

• Daily Happenings
• National News
• International News
• Local Sports
• Sports Columns
• Football Xtra
• Letters to the Editor
• Local Columns
• Engagements
• Anniversaries
• Special Sections
• Classifieds
• Garage Sales
• Statement of Values
• Terms of Service
• Submit News
• Browse notices
• Place a notice
• Sponsored Content

• Today's Paper

Subscribe Today

Health studies continue research and outreach in ep.

EAST PALESTINE — The institutes of higher learning that were awarded National Institute of Health grants to study the health impacts of last year’s Norfolk Southern train derailment are performing outreach and research in the village.

The NIH grants were announced by President Joe Biden during his visit to the village in February and given to research universities to study the short- and long-term effects of the derailment.

The University of Pittsburgh announced its researchers will travel to East Palestine and “partner with community advisers and area citizen-scientists to collect air and water samples from inside about 100 residences in areas surrounding the derailment site.”

The researchers will also “collaborate in collecting bio-specimens as well as data on the health outcomes of 300 volunteer participants.”

Those specimens will be evaluated to detect early signs of liver dysfunction due to possible vinyl chloride exposure.

“After an immediate threat of a disaster is neutralized, there is still much work to be done to meet the public health needs of the community,” said Maureen Lichtveld, dean of Pitt’s School of Public Health. “We have built a transdisciplinary team of experts in environmental health, disaster preparedness, clinical toxicology and psychology to this end, and we are committed to embedding a community-engaged approach in our work.”

The “East Palestine Community-Engaged Environmental Exposure, Health Data, and Biospecimen Bank” is one of two studies the University of Pittsburgh will conduct. The school was awarded a total of nearly $1 million in funding for derailment research with two of the six NIH grants. The second study is “Profiling the Post-Accident Exposome in East Palestine” and will “collect soil, water and sediment samples to characterize the extent of the chemical contamination and the ongoing environmental impact on the region.”

On Wednesday, Dr. Beatrice Golomb of the University of California, San Diego held a question-and-answer session with residents to discuss the “East Palestine Health Effects Study,” discuss potential epidemiological impacts and her past research in toxic exposure. Golomb, who was formerly on VA’s Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses and was the one of the first researchers to present direct evidence between illness and the Gulf War burn pits, had been studying the health impacts of the derailment before getting a NIH grant.

Some have made the comparison of the military burn pits to that of the vent-and-burn performed in East Palestine, and there are similarities. Air testing at the largest of the military burn pits in Balad, Iraq, indicated many polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and volatile organic compounds such as benzo(a)pyrene, toluene and acetone. All three compounds were confirmed by the EPA to be detected in East Palestine surface water sampling with two exceedances of benzo(a)pyrene reported during the recently completed reassessment of Leslie and Sulphur runs ordered by the EPA in October.

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon and Texas A&M also found that levels of acrolein — one of the VOCs identified in large amounts at Balad — were six times higher than normal were detected near the derailment during a two-day period in 2023.

Texas A&M received a NIH grant to continue to study elevated VOC levels, particularly acrolein, in East Palestine following the derailment.

Also on Wednesday, residents were given the opportunity to hear from the Ohio/Pennsylvania University Research Consortium – a group of about two dozen researchers from seven universities, members of the East Palestine health community and responding agencies. The consortium was organized by researchers from Case Western Reserve University, Ohio State, Kent State and Pitt.

The event, which was held at the Way Station, was intended to “explore the scope and limits of publicly available data collected after the train derailment in East Palestine” and “summarize the health issues and symptoms reported by the community following the derailment.”

Case Western was awarded a NIH grant to engage community members and develop dialogue with East Palestine residents to better understand their experiences and concerns during and after the disaster. That study will collect blood and saliva samples to determine how the mixtures of chemicals may have impacted health both short- and long-term.

University of Kentucky and Dr. Erin Haynes, who also had already been tracking the potential health impacts of the rail disaster, accounts for the sixth grant awarded to continue to measure health symptoms, stress and well-being of East Palestine residents. Haynes was one of the first researchers in East Palestine. Last year, her team collected biological samples, tested indoor air and gave residents wristbands to wear that can pick up toxicity in the environment.

Since the rail disaster some residents in East Palestine and the surrounding communities have reported persistent nosebleeds, eye and skin irritation, respiratory ailments and digestive issues among other symptoms. Cognitive issues, seizure-like episodes, heavy menstrual bleeding and growing asthma diagnosis have also been reported.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention collected data in the days and weeks following the rail disaster by requesting residents fill out an assessment of chemical exposure survey. When the preliminary results of the 704 ACE surveys were released in March 2023, it was reported that 76 percent of East Palestine residents participating experienced headaches while 54 percent experienced coughing, 52 percent experienced fatigue and 50 percent experienced a rash or irritation of the skin. In addition, 62 percent reported anxiety. It was later confirmed by the CDC that seven of the agency’s investigators who were in the village to help conduct the survey’s experienced similar symptoms.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

• Daily Newsletter
• Breaking News

Author to speak on Ohio Valley in the 1960s

STEUBENVILLE — Jerry Madden, a graduate of Catholic Central High School, will be returning to his hometown ...

Pool, shelters discussed in Toronto

TORONTO — Concerns about the city’s new approach to pool and shelter rentals were expressed at last week’s ...

Kids’ talent on display at Sycamore Center

EAST PALESTINE — The institutes of higher learning that were awarded National Institute of Health grants to study ...

Moreno, Rulli make campaign stop in Steubenville

Hancock festival among events bringing people to local parks

Starting at $4.73/week..

New study sheds light on the mechanisms underlying the development of malignant pediatric brain tumors

A new study conducted by researchers at Tampere University and Tampere University Hospital revealed how aberrant epigenetic regulation contributes to the development of atypical teratoid/rhabdoid (AT/RT) tumours, which are aggressive brain tumours that mainly affect young children. There is an urgent need for more research in this area as current treatment options are ineffective against these highly malignant tumours.

Most tumours take a long time to develop as harmful mutations gradually accumulate in cells' DNA over time. AT/RT tumours are a rare exception, because the inactivation of one gene gives rise to this highly aggressive form of brain cancer.

AT/RT tumours are rare central nervous system embryonic tumours that predominantly affect infants and young children. On average, 73 people are diagnosed with AT/RT in the USA each year. However, AT/RT is the most common central nervous system tumour in children under one years old and accounts for 40-50% of diagnoses in this age group. The prognosis for AT/RT patients is grim, with a postoperative median survival of only 11-24 months.

The collaborative study conducted by Tampere University and Tampere University Hospital examined how aberrant DNA methylation distorts cellular developmental trajectories and thereby contributes to the formation of AT/RT. DNA methylation is a process whereby methyl groups are added to the DNA strand. DNA methylation is one of the mechanisms that cells use to control gene expression, and methylation patterns change during normal brain development.

The new study showed that DNA methylation interferes with the activity of multiple regulators, which under normal circumstances regulate the differentiation and maturation of central nervous system cells during brain development. Disrupted cell differentiation promotes the abnormal, uncontrolled proliferation of cells that eventually form a tumour.

The study also found several genes that regulate cell differentiation or inhibit tumour development and are silenced in AT/RT together with increased DNA methylation. The findings will pave the way for a more detailed understanding of the epigenetic dysregulation mechanisms in AT/RT pathogenesis and enable researchers to identify which genes contribute to the malignant progression of the tumour.

"These results will provide deeper insights into the development of AT/RTs and their malignancy. In the future, the results will help to accelerate the discovery of new treatments for this aggressive brain tumour," says Docent Kirsi Rautajoki from Tampere University.

At Tampere University, the research was mainly carried out by the research groups led by Kirsi Rautajoki and Professor Matti Nykter. The key partners from Tampere University Hospital included paediatrician, LM Kristiina Nordfors, neurosurgeon and Docent Joonas Haapasalo and neuropathologist and Docent Hannu Haapasalo.

• Brain Tumor
• Human Biology
• Child Development
• Intelligence
• Learning Disorders
• Brain Injury
• Esophageal cancer
• Brain tumor
• Positron emission tomography
• Psycholinguistics
• Bitemporal hemianopsia

Story Source:

Materials provided by Tampere University . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Meeri Pekkarinen, Kristiina Nordfors, Joonas Uusi-Mäkelä, Ville Kytölä, Anja Hartewig, Laura Huhtala, Minna Rauhala, Henna Urhonen, Sergei Häyrynen, Ebrahim Afyounian, Olli Yli-Harja, Wei Zhang, Pauli Helen, Olli Lohi, Hannu Haapasalo, Joonas Haapasalo, Matti Nykter, Juha Kesseli, Kirsi J Rautajoki. Aberrant DNA methylation distorts developmental trajectories in atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumors . Life Science Alliance , 2024; 7 (6): e202302088 DOI: 10.26508/lsa.202302088

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• No Two Worms Are Alike
• Quantum Effects in Electron Waves
• Star Trek's Holodeck Recreated Using ChatGPT
• Cloud Engineering to Mitigate Global Warming
• Detecting Delayed Concussion Recovery
• Bonobos: More Aggressive Than Thought
• Brightest Gamma-Ray Burst
• Stellar Winds of Three Sun-Like Stars Detected
• Fences Causing Genetic Problems for Mammals
• Ozone Impact On Fly Species

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.