differentiated instruction for physical education

• Skip navigation

sites.aph.org

Go to navigation for APH PE

Using Differentiated Instruction in Physical Education

Kathleen Ellis, Lauren Lieberman, and Dani LeRoux

Originally appeared in Palaestra, Volume 24, Number 4, 2009

This article is reproduced with permission. Any further use requires permission from the copyright holder.

With the No Child Left Behind law, teachers are required to be highly qualified in the core area in which they teach. However, is being an expert enough; or better yet, the foundation responsible for a child’s education? A great deal of hype has surrounded the use of differentiated instruction as an effective and successful strategy for educating diverse students within the same setting. Expertise in the content being taught is only a fraction of the overall differentiated instruction picture, as in theory, teachers can be experts in their fields, but may not be experts in how to take into account the diversities of learners. An exemplary teacher not only is an expert in his/her core academic area, but has a strong foundation and use of differentiated instructional principles. Differentiated instruction has the focus of diversity, common outcomes, and is student-centered. It is designed to instigate multiple strategies impacting individual students while focusing on a common goal. In other words, the students are all learning identical content, but the strategy for successfully achieving the common outcome/goal is dependent on individual student learning styles and developmental levels (Lieberman & Houston-Wilson, 2009).

Creating An Effective Learning Climate

Differentiating instruction is not a new concept. It has been incorporated as a successful instructional strategy with gifted and talented students for decades. Over the past several years, the advantage of using differentiated instruction in the inclusive learning environment has gained intense focus. Differentiated instruction in and of itself uses instructional strategies based on individual student learning styles and needs. While its success as an all-inclusive instructional strategy is conclusive when effectively incorporated in various learning environments, it was only recently that the value of differentiated instruction was introduced to the physical education setting (Gregory & Chapman, 2007).

Differentiating instruction in physical education is adapted physical education for all learners in an inclusive classroom environment. While adapted physical education has the focus of adapting or modifying the curriculum, activities, or environment to meet the needs of students with disabilities, differentiated instruction has the focus of modifying the content, learning activities, outcomes, and environment to meet the needs of all diverse learners.

When one walks into a typical physical education class, the first thing that comes to mind is diversity—various sizes, shapes, abilities, desires, motivation levels. However, no matter how diverse, teachers must make the physical education environment one that is conducive to learning. Meeting the needs of diverse learners in an inclusive setting involves taking into account what each child needs from this climate in order to feel comfortable, motivated, and successful (see Table 1).

Table 1 Differentiated Instruction Inclusive Strategies

• Background knowledge and experience
• Learning style(s)
• Multiple intelligences
• Important relationships
• Does the learner have any unique goals?
• Are there particular concerns about this learner?
• Content demands—How is content made available to the learners?
• What processes do teachers use to facilitate student learning?
• How do students demonstrate what they have learned?
• How are they graded?

(Thousand, Villa & Nevin, 2007)

To create an effective learning climate which incorporates instructional strategies promoting inclusion, one may use strategies which are individualized for a given student.

Bethany has low vision and is in a physical education class participating in track and field events. In this case, tactile instruction can be used to teach Bethany the correct form and movement for the shot put, so she can be completely included in the activities with her peers. By focusing on her specific learning style, Bethany can participate in track and field activities.

Knowing the Learner

It is a fairly common understanding among professionals that students differ in their learning styles. In other words, no two students are likely to learn in the exact same way. Some global learning styles involve those who learn best by auditory means, those who learn best visually, and those who learn best by hands on or tactile means. Others may learn best while working with peers, or in small or large groups, or in a more isolated situation (Gregory, & Chapman, 2007). In many cases, students may require more than one learning style to fully grasp concepts being taught. Therefore, understanding individual learning styles and incorporating these into instructional strategies is a requirement, not an option, for differentiated instruction. Knowing your students may be the most important part of differentiated instruction…if you don’t know the important aspects of their learning needs and abilities, then determining effective instructional strategies is nearly impossible. Teachers should take into account characteristics of their students when determining strategies to use, such a various learning styles; ways in which students process information; and use of multiple intelligence theory (Gardner, 1983).

Knowing your learners is critically important in successful lesson planning and arrangement of the learning environment, including grouping strategies.

Samantha loves to play soccer, but because she is totally blind she relies a great deal on her auditory ability. Ms. Judge, the physical education teacher, took this into account when planning the lessons and made sure that all equipment used had some auditory device and that small, cohesive groups were incorporated in order to allow more time on task and peer tutoring. In addition, she looked at her learning style as an auditory and tactile learner and made sure her paraeducator worked with her and helped her become familiar with the learning environment and equipment in use. For example, when learning soccer, Ms. Judge had Samantha use a soccer ball with a bell inside, as well as cones which contained beepers so she knew where to dribble the ball. Ms. Judge physically helped Samantha understand how to dribble and gave her verbal and tactile feedback when she was practicing.

Assessing the Learner

Some of us may remember back during our undergraduate years when we took a course on measurement and evaluation (AKA, tests and measurement). Regardless of when or if such a course was completed, one of the take-home messages was that without assessment no programs or instruction can be effectively incorporated with the expectation of success. The first and foremost step for any program or class is to determine a needs assessment. Completing a needs assessment determines students’ prior knowledge and skills for upcoming lessons or programs; what areas of interest or overall feelings regarding lessons or programs the students demonstrate; what is needed for students to become more proficient or master skills being incorporated; and to determine skill and understanding levels to format learning groups.

One big thing to remember is that assessment is a continuous, ongoing process. It is completed almost daily, sometimes unconsciously, in order to provide immediate, critical feedback, and make changes in the lessons/programs to ensure learning. Parents are often a good place to gain useful information regarding current performance and unique learning information. As a teacher, there is never a time when assessment is not taking place.

Completion of the needs assessment at the beginning assists in implementing the instructional content and strategies used, informal assessment during the teaching and learning processes assists in ensuring the best learning environment for all students; summative assessment at the conclusion of a learning outcome assists in strengthening future learning outcomes for involved students; and regular self-assessments by the teacher may lead to modifications or changes designed to improve strategies used.

It is important to ensure that students are aware of ongoing assessment and defined success.

During a basketball unit, Janessa was included in the formative rubric assessment. The rubric gave a gold medal to any student who could put three or more basketball-related skills together, such as dribbling, passing, and shooting. They could get a silver for two or more skills, bronze for one or more skills, and honorable mention for participation only. Janessa knew the criteria for grading and worked hard with her partner and friend, Sammy, to get a gold medal. She and Sammy even demonstrated their skills for the class at the end of the unit, allowing the class to see a glimpse of wheelchair basketball!

Grouping Students for Learning

Students can be grouped based on readiness to learn certain content or skills. Table 2 discusses the various ways students can be grouped in order to incorporate differentiated strategies.

Table 2 Grouping Strategies within Differentiated Instruction

• Grouping students with a good knowledge of the subject with peers who have lesser understanding allows for those with better understanding to assist in learning of subject
• Grouping students based on knowledge of subject allows for greater attention to specific group based on need
• Mixed ability groups to encourage peer teaching and cooperation
• Focus additional skill building activities with groups showing greater need
• Refinement activities for those with higher skills
• Small mixed ability groups work together toward a common goal
• All group members must be equally involved in activity
• Reduces competition because outcome is not individualistic
• Each member brings something to the group that others do not, hence groups must incorporate each others strengths in order to be successful
• Allows students to choose area of interest and focus on improving skills for lifelong participation
• Higher skilled student of same age or older works with peer on specific skills
• Less intimidating and likely more comfortable than working with teacher
• Benefits both sides in different ways, where one is learning and one is sharing prior knowledge and experience
• Teaching children of same age and ability levels in the same classroom environment
• Allows children to progress at their own rate
• Uses authentic and/or performance based assessment allowing progress to be evaluated based on natural growth and development of skills/performance
• This approach recognizes and honors individual differences as it is more "child-centered"
• Encourages interacting with various ability levels and learning at own rate
• Emphasizes child’s developmental needs and how best to turn them to strengths
• Focuses on the whole child, not just physical development, but also psychologically and socially

(Gregory, & Chapman, 2007)

Ms. Michaels, the physical education teacher, knew the students who had short attention spans, those who could focus for long periods of time, and those who needed some motivation to get moving. She made small cooperative learning groups and combined these learning styles in each group, so the students could motivate each other. Matthew was put into a group as a student who had task persistence and a long attention span, needing only some assistance in activities requiring high balance skills. He, along with his similar peers, Jessica and Michael, helped their group stay focused in Project Adventure to get their group across a moat full of alligators (AKA the balance beam).

Instructional Strategies

As mentioned earlier, differentiated instruction has the focus of diversity. It takes into account not only the content being taught and requires the teacher to be an expert in this area, but also to have a strong foundation of understanding of his/her students, the cognitive learning theory, and strategies for incorporating differentiated instruction. Successful integration of differentiated instruction requires an all-or-none principle. Teachers must be proficient in all four areas or else differentiated instruction strategies are likely not to be effective. Steps for implementing differentiated instruction into the physical education setting include—consistency; planning the program; use of focus activities at start of class; not wasting time; using graphic organizers; using cooperative group learning; using metaphorical and analogous thinking to make meaningful connections; and, awareness of student level of readiness and thinking complexity.

The importance of modifying curriculum and/or equipment to include ALL students is a critical step for any physical educator.

Mr. Estes teaches elementary physical education and his first grade class is one of diverse, mixed abilities. Two of his students, Jonathan and Ryan, have cerebral palsy and use motorized wheelchairs. For the lesson of catching and throwing, he modified the learning environment so that Jonathan and Ryan could catch and throw small and medium beach balls hanging from a line directly in front of them. This allowed them to work at their own pace and level without losing valuable time retrieving equipment. Both Jonathan and Ryan were able to work on their hand-eye coordination and movement of their arms during this activity, which increased their overall upper body movement and range of motion!

Curricular Approaches

Organizing curriculum to meet the various needs of diverse learners is no easy task. Differentiated instruction takes into consideration several strategies related to curriculum approach and organization—learning stations; incorporating projects into your classroom; use choice boards to give students empowerment over learning; use problem-based learning approaches; and incorporate student learning contracts in your classroom.

Bryn’s class was working on bicycling and there were a few modifications to this activity based on student ability level. Ms. Rush knew the students’ level of readiness, and she introduced several options of bikes ranging from two wheelers, three wheelers, two seaters, to tandem bikes. This allowed her students, regardless of ability or disability, to move up in equipment use as their riding ability progressed. Since Bryn had low vision and had never ridden a bike before, she was able to comfortably start with a tandem bike, allowing her to be successful in this unit.

Effective teachers take all of the skills and abilities of their learners into account. By differentiating instruction, students are set up for success and are taught to their strengths. Differentiated instruction does take time, energy, attention, and patience; yet, the outcome is well worth the energy. By assessing each student and then setting up effective instruction, grouping, and curricular approaches, every child will be successful. Table 3 provides an example of considerations for programming to ensure that differentiated instruction is appropriately implemented and successful.

Table 3 Example of Considerations for Programming to Ensure Differentiated Instruction

• When the class is running around cones set on the perimeter of the gym, set a group of 4 cones in a smaller circle inside the gymnasium
• Run/walk for time and not distance
• Have some students play just offense or just defense in games
• Set up fitness stations with several levels to accommodate all learners
• Set up kicking, throwing, or balance beam next to wall
• Allow some children to throw or kick from sitting
• Work on throwing and balancing in the pool
• Have paraeducators work in small groups to help with attention
• Have all students work in stations at their own pace so the student can move along when they complete a skill or station work
• Utilize bright and textured balls and equipment to hold attention of all
• Set students up for a challenge such as number of times they hit the target, number of jumps with a jump rope ,or performing a skill at a specific level to keep them focused
• Infuse more stretching throughout the classes
• Kick a larger ball
• Jump using a wall or on an inclined surface
• Tumble on an incline mat
• Use balloons or beach balls for catching
• Set up stations incorporating a ball on a string
• Have students catch a ball rolling down a ramp or chute
• Use a bounce pass and say the student’s name first

Selected References

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences . New York: Basic Books.

Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2007). Differential instructional strategies . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Lieberman, L. J., & Houston-Wilson, C. (2009). Strategies for inclusion; A handbook for physical educators . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Thousand, S. J., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A.I. (2007). Differentiating instruction . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Tomlinson, C. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Kathleen Ellis is Associate Professor of Adapted Physical Education in the Department of Kinesiology at West Chester University, PA, and serves PALAESTRA as Department Editor for the Calendar section.

Lauren Lieberman is Professor of Adapted Physical Education at SUNY-Brockport, NY. Danielle LeRoux, is Adapted Physical Education Teacher, Cecil County Public Schools, Elkton, MD.

• APE Programs
• Health & Nutrition
• Mailing Lists
• National Services
• Organizations
• Products from APH
• Publications
• Regional and State
• Sport Camps
• Toys and Games

WELCOME EVERYONE

© Copyright American Printing House for the Blind , 1839 Frankfort Ave, Louisville, KY 40206. From U.S. and Canada call toll-free 1-800-223-1839. Open weekdays 8 a.m.–4:30 p.m.

APH is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

Notice: Accessibility of APH Websites

As Physical Education teachers, it is our responsibility to make sure our lessons are barrier-free and meet the diverse needs of our students – this is most commonly known as differentiation [ 1 , 2 ]. It has best been described as ‘the matching of work to the differing capabilities of individuals or groups of pupils in order to extend their learning’ [ 3 ]. By planning for differentiation and integrating all pupils we ensure every student’s fundamental right to access our wonderful subject, whilst also modelling a socially inclusive society which is based upon mutual understanding and respect for individual diversity [1]. Thus, it is essential that we acknowledge students as individuals that learn in different ways and that we need to plan for differentiation by setting suitable learning challenges for all [ 4 , 5 ].

To begin planning for differentiation, teachers should have an open mind, positive attitude and willingness to modify and adapt learning, teaching and assessment strategies and practices [ 1 , 6 ]. Secondly, it is helpful for teachers to know the common principles of differentiation which in the PE community is known as the STTEP principle (see diagram below) [ 5 , 7 ].

The STTEP principle is not the be-all and end-all of differentiation, but it useful when you need to make changes for a lesson [ 5 ]. Nevertheless, within the STTEP principle, we can find all other differentiation strategies fall under. For example, if we look in detail at ‘Task’ from the STTEP principle, we can find numerous approaches such as:

All students participate in the same activities with the teacher expecting a range of different results from students. Essentially, every activity can be considered differentiation by outcome as it doesn’t require any additional planning. Therefore, it is obvious why it has received criticism as the teacher will tend to teach to the mid-level, thus potentially neglecting two-thirds of class as the content would be either too difficult or too easy for most students [2, 5].

At its most simplest is planning different tasks (or versions of the same task) for individuals or groups within the class. This could also be considered as Differentiation by Level as students can work on tasks with varying levels of challenge [2, 5].

Is essentially assigning different positions or responsibilities to students depending upon their abilities. These could include designating leadership responsibilities (i.e., captain, coach, and referee) or even positions within a sport (i.e. Point Guard in basketball would go to the team’s best ballhandler and passer)[2].

Is utilizing different teaching approaches that best suit the student’s ability or the activity. For more independent learners, a student-centered approach would be more appropriate, whilst another group may need a more teacher-centered approach. Also, for activities where safety is paramount (e.g. javelin) a teacher-centered approach is best [2].

Is planning different activities particularly with regards to assessment. Students should be able to demonstrate their understanding in a variety of ways, such as speaking or writing, physically demonstrating a skill whether on their own or part of a group [2].

Is selecting tasks with different focuses such as competitive, co-operative or individual in accordance with student’s maturational and emotional needs. Competitive games can be high-stress situations for young people and a student with Emotional Behavioral Difficulties (EBD) may find them overwhelming if they have built enough confidence in the required skills [2].

For sake of ease, below is a table with all the varying components of the STTEP Principle and how they align with the three different strategy categories: Organization, Presentation, Content [ 2 , 4 , 7 ].

Most of the strategies for differentiation are self-explanatory. One important principle to consider is how students are grouped as in Differentiation by Grouping. Generally students are grouped based on their ability, with the most able students working together and the least experienced students doing the same. However, as Physical Educators we have to be careful not to judge ability based on our perceptions of student’s physical development and skill. Rather, we need to view pupil’s competencies more holistically as they may well possess advanced analytical and evaluative skills or even leadership qualities beyond their years [ 5 ]. As a result, when planning for differentiation by grouping we should utilize a range of grouping strategies such as mixed ability groups, for example, as they may have a greater potential for student progression as students can learn from each other and develop skills, attributes and values that are both inside and outside of the physical domain [ 2 ]. In order to become more competent as teaching practitioners, it is important that we invest time in both planning and trialing a wide array of differentiation strategies with our students and take note of what does and doesn’t work with certain groups and individuals. Furthermore, if you still feel inexperienced in this area, there is a wealth of literature available on this subject matter and most schools have a learning support team that would be encouraged by a visit from a PE teacher.

• Vickerman, P., Walsh, B. & Money, J. (2015) “Planning for an inclusive approach to learning and teaching” In, Capel, S., & Whitehead, M. (2015) Learning to Teach Physical Education in the Secondary School: A companion to school experience. Routledge: Oxon. Pp.156-170
• Bailey, R. (2001) Teaching Physical Education: A handbook for Primary and Secondary School Teachers. London: Kogan Page
• Capel, S. (1997) Learning to Teach Physical Education in the Secondary School: A Companion to School Experience. London: Routledge.
• Medcalf, R. (2012) Towards a more inclusive provision. In Griggs, G. (2012) An Introduction to Primary Physical Education. Oxon: Routledge.
• Grout, H. & Long, G. (2009) Improving Teaching & Learning in Physical Education. Berkshire: Open University Press
• Morley, D., Bailey, R., Tan., J. and Cooke B. (2005) ‘Inclusive Physical Education: teachers’ views of teaching children with special educational needs and disabilities in Physical Education’, European Physical Education Review, 11, 1: 84-87
• YST (Youth Sport Trust) (2008) High Quality Physical Education for Pupils with Autism, Loughborough: Youth Sport Trust.

The leader in quality Physical Education, Athletics, and Fitness equipment for 75 years.

Differentiation in PE: Being Responsive to Our Students’ Needs

“How can we organize and design activities to support students of various backgrounds, readiness and skill levels and interests in Health and Physical Education? ” This is a question I receive often from my student teachers as they begin to explore and discover the complexities of teaching health and physical education during a time in our society that finds us teaching in schools and communities that are more diverse than ever before.

Our Students are coming with various prior learning experiences in HPE related to their cultural, gender, ability, interests, and opportunities. Teachers need to prepare and plan a quality and inclusive learning environment, one that allows all students to develop the motivation and confidence to engage in physical activity whether they are beginning their physical literacy journey in the elementary grades or making progress through their middle school and high school experience. A one size fits all approach does not support all students in HPE.  We need to be responsive to all students’ needs in HPE as their health and well-being depends on it! Differentiated Instruction (DI) is an effective approach.

“ Differentiation is simply a teacher attending to the learning needs of a particular student or small group of students, rather than teaching a class as though all individuals in it were basically alike .” (Carol Ann Tomlinson)

The four components of Differentiated Instruction include:

• Content – what is to be learned
• Process –  how students acquire information
• Product – how students demonstrate their learning
• Learning Environment – where and with whom students learn

Let’s explore each of these components of Differentiated Instruction in relation to teaching HPE:

• Content – Help students identify areas of deficiency in movement skills and physical fitness while modifying the learning process to meet students’ needs; build on their strengths and provide multiple opportunities for formative assessment. LEARN, PRACTICE, DEMONSTRATE, More PRACTICE
• To develop balance and landing skills – Power Jumps or Speed Skater Leaps

• Develop upper body muscular strength –  Wall pushup, Modified pushup on knees, pushup from feet, Spiderman pushup as seen in the image below

• To develop manipulative (carrying skills) – dribble a basketball while stationary, in a forward straight-line motion, weaving through cones, in pairs mirror your partner’s movement while both dribbling
• Cubing involves selecting several activities to develop movement skills and/or fitness skills and a dice. For example, a cubing Yoga Circuit can include 6 different stations, #1–6 with various postures. In pairs, students roll the dice and move to the designated station number to try a posture and hold for a designated length of time. Repeat.
• Individual activities: establish a breathing rhythm when swimming, use a video showing tricks and moves with a skipping rope to learn how to break down a new move into simpler steps
• Target activities: choose a larger target for optimal success
• Net/wall activities: assume a ready position that will allow them to be ready to move in a variety of directions to defend a space
• Striking/fielding activities: throw or kick the ball away from fielders
• Territory activities: help their team keep possession of the ball by making short passes to teammates in a keep-away game or by changing directions quickly when dribbling a basketball) [IS, CT]

• Active Living: monitor progress to- wards fitness goals, noting improvements or lack of improvement and making changes as needed; note how physical activity makes them feel, particularly when they are experiencing stress
• Movement Competence: describe how knowing their strengths and areas for improvement can help when they are learning new skills
• Healthy Living: describe some of the factors or situations that cause them to experience stress Product – Employ several assessment strategies such as conversations, observations, or products for students to demonstrate what they know in a variety of ways. Included below are several assessment tasks to triangulate data of student achievement of learning expectations from the Ontario Elementary 2015 HPE Curriculum .
• Listed are several assessment strategies for HPE adapted from OPHEA’s Inquiry Based Learning in Health and Physical Education Resource .

• Get to know your students’ interests, previous experiences, and goals related to HPE.
• Co-construct success criteria with your students to ensure the learning targets are clear and transparent to them.
• Understand the context in which you are teaching so that you can be culturally relevant and responsive to your students’ needs

Pause and Reflect:

How do you organize and design activities to support students of various backgrounds, readiness and skill levels in Physical Education?

About the Author:

Carolyn Temertzoglou

One response.

Carolyn, I would enjoy a chance to speak with you. i am a member of the Iowa Physical Education Leadership Standards Committee and want to help teachers in our profession help ALL students. We have just installed our standards this year. I am looking to have an informal chat with one who shares our same thoughts. Sincerely, Craig Johnston Central Springs High School Manly, IA 50456 Cell-563 380 1110 [email protected]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The leader in quality Physical Education, Athletics, and Fitness equipment.

Featured Resources

5 ways small sided games make a big impact, author: jessica shawley, a brand new tool for pe you didn’t know you needed, author: brett fuller, 5 skill-based floor hockey games, author: michael beringer, 16 parachute team building activities, author: tim mueller, we're social, motivating unmotivated students​, author: dr. robert pangrazi, jessica shawley, and tim mueller, promoting activity and success through adapted pe, author: dr. robert pangrazi, marci pope and maria corte, author: randy spring.

Join Our Team Testimonials Privacy Policy

Professional Development The PE Huddle Email Sign Up Blog SPARK Dynamic PE ASAP Only From Gopher

SHOP GOPHER

Connect with us on social.

© 2024 Gopher Sport. All Rights Reserved.

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

Sign up to receive the latest physical education resources, activities, and more from educational professionals like you straight to your inbox!

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Four Favorite Physical Education Instructional Strategies—Recommended by Teachers!

• Share article

This week’s “question-of-the-week” is:

What is the single most effective instructional strategy you have used when teaching physical education?

This post “wraps up” a longer series of questions and answers inviting educators from various disciplines to share their “single most effective instructional strategy.”

Five weeks ago, educators shared their recommendations when it came to teaching writing.

Four weeks ago, it was about teaching English-language learners.

Math was the focus three weeks ago.

Posts from two week’s ago were on science .

Last week’s post was on supporting students with learning differences .

Today’s contributors are Michael Gosset, Ed.D, Hunter Burnard , and Claudio Barbieri.

‘Movement Education’

Michael Gosset, Ed.D., is coordinator of physical education for Hostos Community College, CUNY. He has had published several articles and one book on Movement Education and Skill Themes:

If you define strategy as a plan or method, no single strategy can apply at both the kindergarten and 12 th grade levels, as they are so different. Other words to consider when describing how to teach at the various levels include approach and model.

Approaches/models I have used very successfully over decades, for the different levels, are Movement Education (which leads into the Skill Themes approach) for elementary school, and the Sport Education model for secondary school.

Movement Education, when taught using problem-solving methodology, allows children to be creative when “moving.” There is no single correct solution to a problem presented by the teacher such as how can you move on three parts of your body? The solutions are numerous. Movement Education is typically for kindergarten through 2 nd or 3 rd grade.

Once children know “how to move” successfully and understand movement concepts, the Skill Theme approach is a very appropriate approach to use with upper elementary. In the Skill Themes approach, various (sport) skills are repeated throughout the school year, enabling children to practice them more often. This is the opposite of the traditional approach called the Multi-Activity model where several sports are learned and played once yearly. Research has suggested that more students who are taught using the Skill Themes approach toward physical education enjoy it more than the Multi-Activity approach. This can lead to more children being active outside of school. More information on these approaches can be found in books.

The Sport Education model, for secondary students, has been used and researched for over 20 years. Its key for students is its “authenticity”—it makes learning sports fun for students because they not only participate but get to choose a role in its implementation, such as scorekeeper or statistician, just to name a couple. It is authentic because they learn the sport much more in depth than a traditional program of seasonally done sports.

For all levels, I have found teaching by indirect style to be the key to student learning and enjoyment. Another way of stating indirect style is, as previously mentioned, is problem solving. Presenting material in a way that encourages students to think for themselves is enriching and encourages “higher-order thinking skills,” or HOTS. It does indeed require more planning by the instructor, and experience in responding to student inquiries takes time. For example, if a student asks a question such as, “Can we…..,” the answer from the teacher can be, “Does that fit what I asked of you?” rather than “yes.” This is a change of paradigm and thinking for many instructors.

‘Differentiated Instruction’

Hunter Burnard grew up in Binghamton, N.Y. He played college lacrosse at Rutgers University before choosing to pursue a career in education. Hunter, who currently teaches at The Windward School in New York, and his wife are both teachers, and together they share a 1-year-old daughter, Shay:

As physical education teachers, our ultimate goal is to expose students to a variety of sports and game play in order for them to develop the knowledge, skills, and confidence to enjoy a lifetime of healthful physical activity.

Similar to classroom subjects, physical education classes are made up of students with a wide variety of backgrounds and ability levels. On top of this, I teach at a school for students with language-based learning disabilities. Because of this, I believe that the most effective instructional strategy that we employ is differentiated instruction among our students.

One way that we differentiate instruction in our class is through the teaching process, or how the material is presented and learned. For example, when introducing a new skill, I will verbally break down the requirements and strategies required to effectively execute the skill being taught. In addition, I will demonstrate the skill and often use our gymnasium projector to display a short video of what we are learning that day. We may use a video presentation early in the unit to teach a skill such as a wrist shot in hockey or something more conceptual such as route running in football.

In addition, we sometimes use video midway through a unit, prior to game play, to expose students to sports they are likely less familiar with such as European team handball or badminton. Regardless of the unit, by the time the student will need to use a skill in gameplay, they have heard it, seen it, and done it many times on their own or in a small group.

We not only differentiate instruction, but also we differentiate what we ask the students to produce in order to demonstrate understanding. This is critical to challenging students and keeping them engaged. If the goal of a soccer lesson is to introduce passing, I must differentiate my instruction for one student who has never played soccer and another who plays on a competitive travel soccer team. I may require the inexperienced student to simply practice completing 10 passes with a partner from a short distance while using the inside of their foot.

On the other hand, to challenge the more experienced soccer player and to keep them engaged, I would require that student to use their nondominant foot and to pass at a greater distance with accuracy. Ultimately, although we are assessing skill, we are most concerned with effort in our classroom. Therefore, although the students have different ability levels and are demonstrating different difficulty levels of the same skill, I am most concerned with their effort in completing the assignment.

Lastly, we provide opportunities throughout each class for students to raise their hand and volunteer information as another way to demonstrate understanding of the concept or skill being taught that day. This is particularly important for students who understand concepts and strategies required to be successful but struggle to physically complete a task as successfully as they may like because of limited skill or inexperience.

Differentiated instruction undoubtedly requires some additional work while executing a lesson, but I think it is essential to implementing an effective physical education curriculum. The great thing about physical education is that while exposing students to a wide variety of activities, we as educators can learn about students likes, dislikes, skills, and ability levels in a broad range of topics and activities. Differentiating instruction accordingly is the most effective way to maximize the physical education experience for all students.

‘Multisensory’

Claudio Barbieri has been a physical education teacher for nine years, with experience teaching grades 1-12. He currently teaches at The Windward School in New York. He received his bachelor’s degree in physical education from Manhattan College and a master’s degree in health education from Lehman College:

I have been a physical education teacher for nine years in N.Y.C. in both the public and private school settings. There are many strategies we use as educators, but the one I find most effective is a multisensory approach.

This strategy is helpful for all students. The most important thing for me is that students learn the fundamentals of the skill, have fun, and develop confidence throughout the lesson. The multisensory strategy allows students to experience success differently as well. For example, during our basketball unit, one student might feel they were successful if they were able to make one shot using proper form and technique during the unit. However, another student might feel they were successful if they were making their shots more consistently using proper form and technique. In both situations, each student would have the knowledge to go back to the fundamentals they were taught regardless of what kind of learner they are.

The multisensory strategy is a powerful way to teach students in a physical education setting because it covers the needs of all types of learners. This strategy is also a great way for students to develop confidence in volunteering to demonstrate or explain an activity or skill.

Since I use this strategy with all my units and lessons, we have a greater number of students willing to demonstrate or explain an activity or skill as the school year progresses. I would encourage teachers to try this strategy with their classes because everyone learns differently. Lastly, the multisensory strategy will encourage you to become a better educator because you will have to think of all the ways to present your lesson to the class while keeping in mind the variety of ways students learn and retain information.

Thanks to Michael, Hunter, and Claudio for their contributions!

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email (The RSS feed for this blog, and for all Ed Week articles, has been changed by the new redesign—new ones are not yet available). And if you missed any of the highlights from the first nine years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below.

• This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts
• Race & Racism in Schools
• School Closures & the Coronavirus Crisis
• Classroom-Management Advice
• Best Ways to Begin the School Year
• Best Ways to End the School Year
• Student Motivation & Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementing the Common Core
• Facing Gender Challenges in Education
• Teaching Social Studies
• Cooperative & Collaborative Learning
• Using Tech in the Classroom
• Student Voices
• Parent Engagement in Schools
• Teaching English-Language Learners
• Reading Instruction
• Writing Instruction
• Education Policy Issues
• Differentiating Instruction
• Math Instruction
• Science Instruction
• Advice for New Teachers
• Author Interviews
• Entering the Teaching Profession
• The Inclusive Classroom
• Learning & the Brain
• Administrator Leadership
• Teacher Leadership
• Relationships in Schools
• Professional Development
• Instructional Strategies
• Best of Classroom Q&A
• Professional Collaboration
• Classroom Organization
• Mistakes in Education
• Project-Based Learning

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

• Coaching & Skills
• Individual Sports
• Team Sports
• Fitness & Health
• Teaching PE
• Lesson Plans

Select Page

5 ways to differentiate in PE

Aug 3, 2022 | Teaching PE | 0 |

One of the main roles of a PE teacher is to make sure every pupil has the opportunity to succeed, no matter their age, gender, ability or background. Studies have found:

“that implementing a differentiated approach to swimming teaching appears to represent a significant challenge, but this method facilitated student learning outcomes.” Taggart & Jackson, 2014

So how can you differentiate your lesson to make sure each pupil is catered for?

1. By groups

The simplest, and often the most effective, method of differentiation in PE lessons is to group pupils by ability, with the most able pupils working together and the pupils who are still developing their skills working together. This method relies heavily on the teacher knowing the ability of their classes, and being able to assess the pupils quickly. Asking pupils to complete self-assessments of their ability may also aid this.

“No two pupils learn in the same way. Some may learn best while working with peers, or in small or large groups, whilst others learn best in a more isolated situation.” Gregory & Chapman, 2007

Pupils could be grouped by their ability level and then given a slightly different task to complete. This will involve setting a task that can be adapted to include a greater or lesser challenge, and either directing pupils to the appropriate task or asking them to select based on their ability. It may also involve changing the rules of the activity, or how many times a pupil has to complete it.

3. By equipment

By providing pupils with a variety of equipment, PE teachers can ensure that all pupils can access an activity. A great example is a provision of short handle tennis or badminton rackets for developing players, moving on to longer handle rackets as they develop.

4. By outcome

Success can and will look very different for different pupils. Your role as a PE teacher is to identify and celebrate the successes and then move the pupils on to the next challenge. It may be that some pupils have to score 5 baskets in a minute, whilst others have to score 10. Pupils could set themselves a target to take ownership of their learning.

5. By teaching

Finally, the way you as a teacher interact with a pupil can allow differentiation. This can include the amount of support which is given whilst working, the number of instructions given, or the pace at which a pupil or group of pupils is asked to work at.

“For more independent and advanced learners, a pupil-centred approach may be more appropriate, whilst developing learners may need a more teacher-centred approach. Also, for activities where safety is paramount, such as javelin or trampolining, a teacher-centred approach is required.” Bailey, 2001

In summary, differentiation is a simple concept to explain, however, implementing it is complex and requires careful planning and a secure knowledge of each pupil you teach. Do not be afraid to try and adapt a variety of different methods of differentiation, and do not be disheartened if a strategy doesn’t work the first time.

Make sure to check out PEOffice to see what it can offer you. You can also ring the team on 01909 776 900, send an email to [email protected] or book a free online demonstration here . 

Related Posts

7 factors to consider when organising a school ski trip

July 21, 2023

The New 2014 PE National Curriculum: Assessment Without Levels

April 25, 2014

The New PE National Curriculum

September 23, 2014

3 ways to encourage transgender pupils in PE

April 10, 2023

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Safeguarding Training

Introduction to safeguarding children in football.

The Introduction to Safeguarding Children in Football course from Keys To Safeguarding is suitable for anyone working with and supporting children and young people in football.

This expert-led course is CPD-accredited and will help you develop skills and knowledge in order to identify a child at risk of abuse, and implement safeguarding strategies.

Keys To Safeguarding provides effective safeguarding courses and services to help schools, sports clubs, faith settings, care homes and charities create a safe environment.

Designated and Senior Safeguarding Lead in a Sporting Organisation

The Designated and Senior Safeguarding Lead in a Sporting Organisation training course is for staff who will be carrying out the responsibilities of the senior or designated safeguarding lead in a sporting organisation.

The course has been created by safeguarding experts and is CPD-accredited. It will help you understand how to implement effective safeguarding, foster inclusion and diversity, and support physical and emotional wellbeing.

Safer Recruitment, Managing Allegations and the LADO Process

Safer Recruitment, Managing Allegations and the LADO Process is a CPD-accredited and expert-led training course from Keys To Safeguarding.

Complete this course to discover how to develop your skills so you can act confidently with increased knowledge of safer recruitment practices and recent legislation.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience and provide some essential functions. Details are available in our Privacy Policy . You can accept all cookies (which will help us understand how visitors interact with our website) or opt out of non-necessary cookies.

Privacy Overview

Pin it on pinterest.

• Print Friendly

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

• < Previous

Home > Community Health > Faculty Publications > 187

Community Health Faculty Publications

Differentiating instruction in physical education: personalization of learning.

Gavin T. Colquitt , Georgia Southern University, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health Follow Tony A. Pritchard , Georgia Southern University Follow Christine Johnson , University of West Georgia Follow Starla McCollum , Georgia Southern University Follow

Document Type

Publication date, publication title.

Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance

10.1080/07303084.2017.1340205

Differentiated instruction (DI) is a complex conceptual model and philosophy that is implemented in many traditional classroom settings. The primary focus of DI is to personalize the learning process by taking into account individual differences among students' varied levels of readiness, interest and learning profile. Varied assessments are used to gain a deeper understanding of student readiness, while certain teaching strategies are used to capitalize on student interest. Student learning profiles are developed as teachers gain an understanding of individual learning styles, intelligence preferences, gender and culture. Each of these individual differences can have a profound effect on the way students learn and are important considerations for teachers. To date, the application of DI in physical education has been limited and has primarily been considered in its application to adapted physical education. The purpose of this article is to provide physical education teachers with an overview of DI and practical methods to incorporate traditional best teaching practices to differentiate instruction for diverse learners.

Recommended Citation

Colquitt, Gavin T., Tony A. Pritchard, Christine Johnson, Starla McCollum. 2017. "Differentiating Instruction in Physical Education: Personalization of Learning." Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance , 88 (7): 44-50. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2017.1340205 https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/commhealth-facpubs/187

Since October 19, 2017

Search GS Commons

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Browse GS Commons

• Collections
• Disciplines
• GS Scholars Profiles

About GS Commons

• Submit Research
• Department of Community Health

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• DOI: 10.1080/07303084.2017.1340205
• Corpus ID: 149255977

Differentiating Instruction in Physical Education: Personalization of Learning

• G. Colquitt , Tony A. Pritchard , +1 author Starla McCollum
• Published 29 August 2017
• Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance

41 Citations

Socialization of preservice adapted physical educators: influence of teacher education., 21st century skills: education & values, academy, community and research development and implementation of the each program, teachers’ perceptions of differentiation following a math curriculum implementation study, elementary school physical education teachers' attitudes toward the use of mobile learning during covid-19 pandemic, differentiated instruction based on multiple intelligences as promising joyful and meaningful learning, comparing effects of a tpsr training program on prospective physical education teachers’ social goals, discipline and autonomy strategies in spain, chile and costa rica, strengthening the connection between differentiated instruction strategies and teaching personal and social responsibility: challenges, strategies, and future pathways, the cost of going big: class size in middle school physical education, differentiation instruction publications in physical education: bibliometric analysis of the last ten years, assessment in action: investigating the practices of malaysian physical and health education teachers, 60 references, using the personalized system of instruction to differentiate instruction in fitness, fun and creative unit assessment ideas for all students in physical education, differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: a review of literature, physical education for learning : a guide for secondary schools, sport education and multiple intelligences: a path to student success, standards-based physical education curriculum development, student attitudes towards physical education: a multicultural study, teaching physical education for learning, teaching elementary students through their individual learning styles: practical approaches for grades 3-6.

• Highly Influential

Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design: Connecting Content and Kids

Related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

How Differentiated Instruction Can Help You Reach Every Student in Class

By andy minshew.

• July 24, 2020

It may seem like common sense that students perform better in class when they receive support that meets their needs. Research around differentiated instruction confirms this is true. If you can adapt your instruction to reflect your students’ needs and learning preferences, you can make class time more effective and help students become more engaged.

What is Differentiated Instruction?

The idea behind differentiated learning theory is to make sure your curriculum reflects the diverse needs of your students.[9] Each student enters the classroom with unique experiences, preferences, and conditions that affect how they learn. Differentiated instruction provides students with different resources or options for understanding and mastering a concept, depending on their unique needs.[4] This can help move your classroom from heterogenous instruction toward individualized learning. [4,6]

Differentiated instruction doesn’t necessarily involve giving every student separate assignments—though you may adapt or modify assignments as specific needs arise. It’s more about providing students, individually or in a group, with different learning options or providing accommodations to help them learn more effectively.[11]

Sounds familiar? Differentiated instruction is often compared to the learning styles theory , which posits that all students respond best to one of four learning methods. While research into learning styles is mixed, there are clear and measurable benefits to adapting your teaching methods to your students’ needs.

Benefits of Differentiated Learning for Students

In a survey from the International Journal of Education, 97% of teachers reported never or seldom using a flexible curriculum for their students.[2] So why should you consider bringing differentiated learning into your classroom? The research is clear: students, especially those with diverse learning needs, learn more effectively when teachers respond to their needs.

A study published by Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences found that students’ learning outcomes significantly improve when teachers use differentiated content that responds to a student’s learning preferences.[5] Students are also more likely to focus and be engaged in the learning process when teachers differentiate their instructional strategies.[1,6] As you provide opportunities for students to explore content based on their strengths, they’re more likely to flourish in your class.

Differentiated instruction strategies are especially important for students with physical or learning disabilities.[4] These students often have strengths and weaknesses that are different from other students who don’t have the same disability. By differentiating your instruction, you can adapt lessons or assignments for these students to better accommodate their needs.[4]

How to Differentiate Instruction in Your Classroom

Now that we’ve gone over why differentiated learning matters in the classroom, let’s go over instructional strategies. Some teachers may feel discouraged because differentiated instruction can sound like an increased workload.[2] But differentiated instruction can make your teaching strategies more effective over time, which can help you make the most of both your students’ time and your own.

According to educational researcher and differentiated instruction expert Carol Ann Tomlinson, there are four key ways to differentiate classroom instruction:[8]

• Content : How the student will access the information
• Process : The method of the activities students use to understand the information
• Product : Projects or homework that ask the student to practice or apply the information
• Learning environment : The space where the student is learning the information

If a student might work more efficiently in a quieter learning environment, for example, you could allow them to complete a project in the school library. Or if you think a student would respond to a more visual approach with vocabulary words, you could adjust the content to include images with each word or adjust the product by assigning them to draw a picture that represents the words.

Additionally, don’t get overwhelmed by feeling that you have to make all of your assignments unique for each student. Some students may have specific needs that require you to adjust your assignments or teaching strategy. But in many cases, you can practice differentiated learning by either breaking students with similar needs into groups or offering all students several options for completing an assignment.[10]

Overall, the best way to practice differentiated instruction is by getting to know your students. As you work with them over the school year, you’ll be able to better understand their needs and what types of assignments they respond to.[9] And just as important, you’ll be able to help them recognize their own strengths and learning preferences—which can help them seek out the right learning strategies through their academic career.

Waterford’s Adaptive Curriculum Offers Differentiated Instruction

Waterford ensures that students learn to read through thousands of games, songs, and activities. Our programs assign these lessons based on a student’s placement assessment and their demonstrated mastery. That way, the focus is always on the skills where they need the most practice.

And for older students, you can adjust our book-based study guides to offer personalized lessons on books you’re reading as a class. Students can also select independent reading books from our online library. When students choose what to read based on their personal interests, it encourages focus and engagement.

To learn more , get in touch! We’d love to discuss how our PreK–6 reading programs can revolutionize the way you support your students as they move from “learning to read” to “reading to learn.”

• Morgan, H. Maximizing Student Success with Differentiated Learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 2014, 87(1), pp. 34-38.
• Jager, T. Guidelines to assist the implementation of differentiated learning activities in South African secondary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 2013, 17(1), pp. 80-94.
• Mentis, M. Different Technologies for Differentiated Education: Social Networks, Identity and Diversity in e-Learning. International Journal of Diversity in Organizations: Annual Review, November 2007, 7(3), pp. 85-93.
• Landrum, T.J., and McDuffie, K.A. Learning Styles in the Age of Differentiated Instruction. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 2010, 18(1), pp. 6-17.
• Tulbure, C. Do different learning styles require differentiated teaching strategies? Retrieved from sciencedirect.com: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042811000541
• Subban, P. Differentiated Instruction: A Research Basis. International Education Journal, 2006, 7(7), pp. 935-947.
• Tomlinson, C.A. Mapping a Route Toward Differentiated Instruction. Educational Leadership, September 1999, 57(1), pp. 12-16.
• Weselby, C. What is Differentiated Instruction? Examples of How to Differentiate Instruction in the Classroom. Retrieved from resilienteducator.com: https://resilienteducator.com/classroom-resources/examples-of-differentiated-instruction/.
• NYUSteinhardt Staff. Culturally Responsive Differentiated Instructional Strategies. Retrieved from nyu.edu: https://research.steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/005/120/Culturally%20Responsive%20Differientiated%20Instruction.pdf.
• Tomlinson, C.A. Differentiation of Instruction in the Elementary Grades. Retrieved from ericdigests.org: https://www.ericdigests.org/2001-2/elementary.html.
• Tucker, G.C. Differentiated Instruction: What You Need to Know. Retrieved from understood.org: https://www.understood.org/en/learning-thinking-differences/treatments-approaches/educational-strategies/differentiated-instruction-what-you-need-to-know.

More education articles

Don’t Prevent Summer Slide—Build Student Strengths Instead

MacKenzie Scott’s Yield Giving Awards Waterford.org a $10 Million Grant

What is differentiated instruction?

By Geri Coleman Tucker

Expert reviewed by Kylah Torre

At a glance

Differentiated instruction is a teaching approach that tailors instruction to students’ different learning needs.

It lets students show what they know in different ways.

It doesn’t replace the goals in a child’s IEP or 504 plan.

Differentiated instruction is a teaching approach that tailors instruction to all students’ learning needs. All the students have the same learning goal. But the instruction varies based on students’ interests, preferences, strengths, and struggles.

Instead of teaching the whole group in one way (like a lecture), a teacher uses a bunch of different methods. This can include teaching students in small groups or in one-on-one sessions. 

Students have “multiple options for taking in information, making sense of ideas, and expressing what they learn,” says Carol Ann Tomlinson, an educator who has done innovative work in this area .

According to Tomlinson, there are four areas where teachers can differentiate instruction:

Content: Figuring out what a student needs to learn and which resources will help

Process: Activities that help students make sense of what they learn

Projects: Ways for students to “show what they know”

Learning environment: How the classroom “feels” and how the class works together

This approach works well with the response to intervention (RTI) process used in some schools. The goal of RTI is to address learning struggles early. Students get extra support before they fall behind their peers.

Dive deeper

How differentiated instruction works.

Differentiated instruction can play out differently from one classroom to the next — and from one school to the next. But there are a few key features:

Small work groups: The students in each group rotate in and out. This gives them a chance to participate in many different groups. A group can include a pair of students or a larger group. In all cases, it’s an opportunity for students to learn from each other.

Reciprocal learning: Sometimes students become teachers, sharing what they’ve learned and asking classmates questions.

Continual assessment: Teachers regularly monitor students’ strengths and weaknesses (in both formal and informal ways) to make sure they’re progressing in their knowledge and mastery of schoolwork.

Educators, learn more about how to use flexible grouping with small groups.

Differentiated instruction and special education

A teacher uses differentiated instruction to give every student multiple paths to learning. That includes students with Individualized Education Programs ( IEPs ) or 504 plans . 

Differentiated instruction doesn’t replace the goals in an IEP or a 504 plan. Instead, the teacher personalizes teaching to help kids meet those goals.

Learn more about setting annual IEP goals .

How it compares to other approaches

Differentiated instruction is not the same as individualized instruction. That type of teaching changes the pace of how students learn. It also requires an individual approach for each student, which isn’t the case with differentiation.

Differentiated instruction is also different from personalized learning. With personalized learning, students have their own learning profiles and paths to follow.

Find out more about personalized learning and the difference between individualized instruction and differentiated instruction .

What to watch out for

Critics say differentiated instruction doesn’t work in every classroom. If there are too many students in a class, or if the teacher isn’t experienced with the approach, the classroom can get distracting and chaotic. It can also be time-consuming for teachers.

Other critics say that differentiated instruction is a reaction to students’ needs. They say educators should use Universal Design for Learning to proactively create an environment that suits all students’ needs.

Discover more about Universal Design for Learning . 

Explore related topics

Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Establish Effective Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms

• Open Access
• First Online: 28 June 2023

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Esther Gheyssens   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4871-6780 4 , 5 ,
• Júlia Griful-Freixenet   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9317-9617 5 , 6 &
• Katrien Struyven   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6562-2172 5 , 7  

17k Accesses

3 Citations

Differentiated Instruction has been promoted as a model to create more inclusive classrooms by addressing individual learning needs and maximizing learning opportunities. Whilst differentiated instruction was originally interpreted as a set of teaching practices, theories now consider differentiated instruction rather a pedagogical model with philosophical and practical components than the simple act of differentiating. However, do teachers also consider differentiated instruction as a model of teaching? This chapter is based on a doctoral thesis that adopted differentiated instruction as an approach to establish effective teaching in inclusive classrooms. The first objective of the dissertation focused on how differentiated instruction is perceived by teachers and resulted in the DI-Quest model. This model, based on a validated questionnaire towards differentiated instruction, pinpoints different factors that explain differences in the adoption of differentiated instruction. The second objective focused on how differentiated instruction is implemented. This research consisted of four empirical studies using two samples of teachers and mixed method. The results of four empirical studies of this dissertation are discussed and put next to other studies and literature about differentiation. The conclusions highlight the importance of teachers’ philosophy when it comes to implementing differentiated instruction, the importance of perceiving and implementing differentiated instruction as a pedagogical model and the importance and complexity of professional development with regard to differentiated instruction.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Differentiated Instruction, Perceptions and Practices

Measuring differentiated instruction in The Netherlands and South Korea: factor structure equivalence, correlates, and complexity level

Defining differentiation in cyber schools: what online teachers say.

• Differentiated instruction
• Effective teaching
• Inclusive classrooms

1 Introduction

Differentiated Instruction (DI) has been promoted as a model to facilitate more inclusive classrooms by addressing individual learning needs and maximizing learning opportunities (Gheyssens et al., 2020c ). DI aims to establish maximal learning opportunities by differentiating the instruction in terms of content, process, and product in accordance with students their readiness, interests and learning profiles (Tomlinson, 2017 ). This chapter is based on a doctoral thesis that adopted DI as an approach to establish effective teaching in inclusive classrooms. This doctoral dissertation consisted of four empirical studies towards the conceptualisation and implementation of DI (Gheyssens, 2020 ). This chapter summarizes the most important results of this dissertation and includes three parts. First the conceptualisation of DI is discussed. Second, we discuss literature findings regarding the effectiveness of DI. Third, the results of the studies about the implementation of DI are discussed. Finally, based on the previous parts some recommendations for implementation are presented.

2 Conceptualisation of Differentiated Instruction

2.1 defining differentiated instruction.

Differentiated instruction (DI) is an approach that aims to meet the learning needs of all students in mixed ability classrooms by establishing maximal learning and differentiating instruction with regard to content, process and product in accordance with student needs in terms of their readiness (i.e., student’s proximity to specified learning goal), interests (i.e., passions, affinities that motivate learning) and learning profiles (i.e., preferred approaches to learning) (Tomlinson, 2014 ). Whilst DI was originally interpreted as a set of teaching practices or simplified as the act of differentiating (e.g. van Kraayenoord, 2007 ; Tobin, 2006 ), it is evolved towards a pedagogical model with philosophical and practical components (Gheyssens, 2020 ). This model is rooted in the belief that diversity is present in every classroom and that teachers should adjust their education accordingly (Tomlinson, 1999 ). Tomlinson ( 2017 ) states that DI is an approach where teachers are proactive and focus on common goals for each student by providing them with multiple options in anticipation of and in response to differences in readiness, interest, and learning needs (Tomlinson, 2017 ). From this perspective, differentiation refers to an educational process where students are made accountable for their abilities, talents, learning pace, and personal interests (Op ‘t Eynde, 2004 ). This means that teachers proactively plan varied activities addressing what students need to learn, how they will learn it, and how they show what they have learned. This increases the likelihood that each student will learn as much as he or she can as efficiently as possible (Tomlinson, 2005 ). Moreover, DI emphasizes the needs of both advanced and struggling learners in mixed-ability classroom. In more detail, Bearne ( 2006 ) and Tomlinson ( 1999 ) consider differentiation as an approach to teaching in which teachers proactively adjust curricula, teaching methods, resources, learning activities and student product so that various student’s needs are satisfied (individuals or small groups) and every student is provided with maximum learning opportunities (in Tomlinson et al., 2003 ).

2.2 The DI-Quest Model

Considering DI as a pedagogical model rather than as a set of teaching strategies became also clear in the validity study of Coubergs et al. ( 2017 ) when they tried to measure DI empirically. Their research resulted in the so-called ‘DI-Quest model’, based on the DI-questionnaire the researchers developed for investigating DI. This model pinpoints different factors that explain differences in the adoption of differentiated instruction (Coubergs et al., 2017 ). It was inspired by the differentiated instruction model developed by Tomlinson ( 2014 ), which presents a step by step process demonstrating how a teacher moves from thinking about DI toward implementing it in the classroom. According to this model, the teacher can differentiate content, process, product, and environments to respond to different needs in learning based on students’ readiness, learning profiles, and interests. Tomlinson ( 2014 ) also stipulates that, to respond adequately to students’ learning needs, teachers should apply general classroom principles such as respectful tasks, flexible grouping, and ongoing assessment and adjustment. In contrast with Tomlinson’s well-known DI model, which also contains concepts relating to good teaching, the DI-Quest model distinguishes teachers who use DI less often from those who use it more often (Gheyssens et al., 2020c ). The DI-Quest model comprises five factors. The five factors are presented in three categories. The key factor, similar to Tomlinson’s ( 2014 ) model, is adapting teaching to students’ readiness, interests, and learning profiles. This is the main factor because it represents the ‘core business’ of differentiating: the teachers adapt his/her teaching to three essential differences in learning. The second and third factors represent DI as a philosophy. The fourth and fifth factor represent differentiated strategies in the classroom (Fig. 30.1 ). Below the figure the different factors are discussed on detail.

The DI-Quest model

2.2.1 Adaptive Teaching

Adaptive teaching illustrates that the teacher provides various options to enable students to acquire information, digest, and express their understanding in accordance with their readiness, interests, and learning profiles (Tomlinson, 2001 ). Differences in learning profiles are described by Tomlinson and colleagues ( 2003 , p. 129) as “a student’s preferred mode of learning that can be affected by a number of factors, including learning style, intelligence preference and culture.” Applying different learning profiles positively influences the effectiveness of learning because students get the opportunity to lean the way they learn best. Responding to student interests also appears to be related to more positive learning experiences, both in the short and long term (Woolfolk, 2010 ; Tomlinson et al., 2003 ). Ryan and Deci ( 2000 ) claimed that understanding what motivates students will help develop interest, joy, and perseverance during the learning process. Thus, investing in differences in interests increases learning motivation among students. Taking account of students’ readiness can also lead to higher academic achievement. Readiness focuses on differences arising from a student’s learning position relative to the learning goals that are to be attained (Woolfolk, 2010 ). When taking students’ readiness into account enables every student to attain the learning objectives in accordance with their learning pace and position (Gheyssens et al., 2021 ).

2.2.2 Philosophy of DI

The first philosophical factor to consider is the ‘growth mindset’. Tomlinson ( 2001 ) addressed the concept of mindset in her DI model by stating that a teacher’s mindset can affect the successful implementation of differentiated instruction (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2011 ). Teachers with a growth mindset set high goals for their students and believe that every student is able to achieve success when they show commitment and engagement (Dweck, 2006 ). The second philosophical factor is the ‘ethical compass’. This envisions the use of curriculum, textbooks, and other external influences as a compass for teaching rather than observations of the student (Coubergs et al., 2017 ; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010 ). An ethical compass that focuses on the student embodies the development of meaningful learning outcomes, devises assessments in line with these, and creates engaging lesson plans designed to enhance students’ proficiency in achieving their learning goals (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010 ). Research on self-reported practices demonstrated that teachers with an overly rigid adherence to a curriculum that does not take students’ needs into account, report to adopt less adaptive teaching practices (Coubergs et al., 2017 ; Gheyssens et al., 2020c ).

2.2.3 Differentiated Classroom Practices

The next factor is the differentiated practice to be explained is ‘flexible grouping’. Switching between homogeneous and heterogeneous groups helps students to progress based on their abilities (when in homogeneous groups) and facilitates learning through interaction (when in heterogeneous groups) (Whitburn, 2001 ). Given that the aim of differentiated instruction is to provide maximal learning opportunities for all students, variation between homogeneous and heterogeneous teaching methods is essential. Coubergs et al. ( 2017 ) found that combining different forms of flexible grouping positively predicts the self-reported use of adaptive teaching in accordance with differences in learning. The final factor in the DI-Quest model is the differentiated practice ‘Output = input.’ This factor represents the importance of using output from students (such as information from conversations, tasks, evaluation, and classroom behaviour) as a source of information. This output of students is input for the learning process of the students themselves by providing them with feedback. But this output is also crucial input for the teacher in terms of information about how students react to his/her teaching (Hattie, 2009 ). Assessment and feedback are not the final steps in the process of teaching, but they are an essential part of the process of teaching and learning (Gijbels et al., 2005 ). In this regard, Coubergs et al. ( 2017 ) state that including feedback as an essential aspect of learning positively predicts the self-reported use of adaptive teaching.

3 Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction

Several studies dealing with the effectiveness of DI have demonstrated a positive impact on student achievement (e.g. Beecher & Sweeny, 2008 ; Endal et al., 2013 ; Mastropieri et al., 2006 ; Reis et al., 2011 ; Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ; Valiandes, 2015 ). However, while recent theories plead for a more holistic interpretation of DI, being a philosophy and a practice of teaching, empirical studies on the impact on student learning are often limited to one aspect of DI, e.g. ability grouping, tiering, heterogenous grouping, individualized instruction, mastery learning or another specific operationalization of DI (e.g. Bade & Bult, 1981 ; Tomlinson, 1999 ; Vanderhoeven, 2004 ; Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ). Often studies on DI are also fragmented in studies on ability grouping, tiering, heterogenous grouping, individualized instruction, mastery learning or another specific operationalization of DI (Coubergs et al., 2013 ; Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ). Although effectiveness can be found for most of these operationalisations, overall the evidence is limited and sometimes even inconclusive (e.g. evidence of the benefits on ability grouping). Indeed research indicates that DI has the power to benefit students’ learning. However, this might not always be the case for all students. For example Reis and colleagues demonstrated that at-risk students are most likely to benefit from DI (e.g. Reis et al., 2011 ). By contrast, experimental research on DI by Valiandes ( 2015 ) showed that although the socioeconomic status of students correlated with their initial performance, it had no effect on their progress. This confirmed that DI can maximize learning outcomes for all students regardless of their socioeconomic background. It also depends on how DI is implemented, for example the effects of ability grouping may differ for subgroups of students (Coubergs et al., 2013 ). A recent review on DI concluded that studies of effectiveness of DI overall report small to medium-sized positive effects of DI on student achievement. However, the authors of this study plead for more empirical studies towards the effectiveness of DI on both academic achievement and affective students’ outcomes, such as attitudes and motivation (Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ).

4 Implementation of Differentiated Instruction

Differentiated instruction is often presented in a fragmented fashion in studies. For example, it can be defined as a specific set of strategies (Bade & Bult, 1981 ; Woolfolk, 2010 ) or studies with regard to the effectiveness of DI often focus on specific differentiated classroom actions, rather than on DI as a whole-classroom approach (Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ). Moreover, DI is not only in studies fragmented defined and investigated, DI is also perceived by teachers in a fragmented way (Gheyssens, 2020 ). For example, using mixed methods, this study explored to what degree differentiated practices are implemented by primary school teachers in Flanders (Gheyssens et al., 2020a ). Data were gathered by means of three different methods, which are compared: teachers’ self-reported questionnaires (N = 513), observed classroom practices and recall interviews (N = 14 teachers). The results reveal that there is not always congruence between the observed and self-reported practices. Moreover, the study seeks to understand what encourages or discourages teachers to implement DI practices. It turns out that concerns about the impact on students and school policy are referred to by teachers as impediments when it comes to adopting differentiated practices in classrooms. On teacher level, some teachers expressed a feeling of powerlessness towards their teaching and have doubts if their efforts are good enough. On school level, a development plan was often missing which gave teachers the feeling that they are standing alone (Gheyssens et al., 2020a ). Other studies confirm that when beliefs about teaching and learning are different among various actors involved in a school, this can limit DI implementation (Beecher & Sweeny, 2008 ). However, we know form the DI-Quest model how important a teachers’ mindset is when it comes to implementing DI. In this specific study teachers were asked about both hindrances and encouragements to implement DI. Teachers only responded with hindrances. In addition, flexible grouping, which in theory is an ideal teaching format when it comes to differentiation, occurs often randomly in the classroom without the intention to differentiate. The researchers of this study concluded that teachers do not succeed in implementing DI to the fullest because their mindset about DI is not as advanced as their abilities to implement differentiated practices. These practices, such as flexible grouping for example, are often part of the curriculum. Moreover, also in teacher education programmes pre-service teachers are trained to use differentiated strategies. However, teacher education programmes approach DI mostly again as a set of teaching practices. Teaching a mindset is much more difficult and complicated. This focus on DI as only a practice and as a pedagogical model, like the DI-Quest model demonstrates, leads to partial implementation of DI. DI is then perceived as something teachers can do “sometimes” in their classrooms, rather than a pedagogical model that is embedded in the daily teaching and learning process (Gheyssens et al., 2020a ).

In other words, one aspect of DI is often implemented, one specific teaching format is applied, or one strategy is adopted to deal with one specific difference between learning. As a consequence, some aspects will be improved or some students will benefit from this approach, but the desired positive effects on the total learning process of all the students that theories about DI promise, will remain unforthcoming. Below some recommendations are listed to implement DI more as a pedagogical model and less fragmented.

4.1 Importance of the Teachers’ Philosophy

Review studies which investigated the effectiveness and implementation of specific operationalizations of DI (for example grouping) report small to medium effects on student achievement (Coubergs et al., 2013 ; Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019 ). Although theories recommend approaching DI as a holistic concept, the effectiveness of such a holistic approach on student learning has, to our knowledge, not yet been investigated. We emphasize the importance of presenting and perceiving DI as a pedagogical model that is regarded as a philosophy of teaching and a collection of teaching practices (Tomlinson, 2017 ). Thus, DI is considered a pedagogical model that is influenced by teachers’ mindset and one which encourages teachers to be proactive, involves modifying curricula, teaching methods, resources, learning activities and student products in anticipation of, and response to, student differences in readiness, interests and learning profiles, in order to maximize learning opportunities for every student in the classroom (Coubergs et al., 2017 ; Tomlinson, 2017 ). In this regard we would also like to emphasize that these modifications do not necessary involve new teaching strategies and extra workload for teachers, but require that teachers shift their mindset and start acting more pro-actively, planned better and be more positive. In a study that investigated the effectiveness of a professional development programme about inclusive education on teachers’ implementation of differentiated instruction, teachers stated that after participating in the programme they did not necessarily adopt more differentiated practices, but they did the ones they used more thoroughly (Gheyssens et al., 2020b ). As demonstrated in the DI-Quest model, in order to implement DI as a pedagogical model, it is essential to start with the teachers’ philosophy. However, changing a philosophy does not come about overnight, but rather demands time and patience (Gheyssens, 2020 ).

4.2 Importance and Complexity of Professional Development

When DI becomes a pedagogical model that consists of both philosophy and practice components, and furthermore demands that teachers have a positive mindset towards DI in order to implement DI effectively, professional development for some teachers is necessary to strengthen their competences and to support them in embedding DI in their classrooms. Depending on the current mindset of the teacher, some will need more support, while for other teachers differentiating comes naturally. However, if we want teachers to implement DI as a pedagogical model and not just as fragmented practices, teachers need to be prepared and supported. Professional development is essential for teachers to respond adequately to the changing needs of students during their careers (Keay & Lloyd, 2011 ; EADSNE, 2012 ). However, professional development is also complex. The final study in the dissertation of Gheyssens ( 2020 ) investigated the effectiveness of a professional development programme (PDP) aimed at strengthening the DI competences of teachers. A quasi-experimental design consisting of a pre-test, post-test, and control group was used to study the impact of the programme on teachers’ self-reported differentiated philosophies and practices. Questionnaires were collected from the experimental group (n = 284) and control group (n = 80) and pre- and post-test results were compared using a repeated measures ANOVA. Additionally, interviews with a purposive sample of teachers (n = 8) were conducted to explore teachers’ experiences of the PDP. The results show that the PDP was not effective in changing teachers’ DI competences. Multiple explanations are presented for the lack of improvement such as treatment fidelity, the limitations of instruments, and the necessary time investment (Gheyssens et al., 2020b ).

We found similar information in other studies. For example Brighton et al. ( 2005 ) stated that the biggest challenge for most teachers is that DI questions their previous beliefs. This ties in with our emphasis on teachers’ mindset. To participate in professional development, teachers need to have/keep an open mind in order to respond to new forms of diversity and new opportunities for collaborating with colleagues. Although continued professional development is necessary and important for teachers, it is a complex process. We refer to the work of Merchie et al. ( 2016 ) who identified nine characteristics of effective professional development, with one of them being that the supervisor is of high quality and is competent when it comes to giving and receiving constructive feedback and imparting other coaching skills (Merchie et al., 2016 ). Literature states that professional development is only successful if teachers are active participants, if they have a voice in what and how they learn things, and if the PDP is tailored to the specific context (Merchie et al., 2016 ). However, PDP often works towards a specific goal which is not always very flexible. A suitable coach is able to find a balance between these two extremes. Or, specifically within inquiry-based learning as an example, the coach needs to find the fragile balance between telling the teachers what to do, and letting them find their own answers. Finding such a balance and guiding teachers towards looking for and finding the answers they need is important if we wish to establish the desired improvement we want to see in teachers’ professional development. In this regard, Willegems et al. ( 2016 ) plead for the role of a broker as a bridge-maker in professional development trajectories, in addition to the role of coach (Willegems et al., 2016 ).

4.3 Importance of Collaboration

In addition, collaboration is indeed essential for effective professionalisation (Merchie et al., 2016 ) and beneficial for DI implementation (De Neve et al., 2015 ; Latz & Adams, 2011 ). In a professional development study where inquiry-based learning was applied to teams of teachers at schools, teachers reported positive experiences in discussing their individual learning activities, and during the programme became aware of the need to work together on the collective development of knowledge in the school. They all agreed that to implement DI they needed to collaborate more. A common school vision and policy is necessary for the implementation of specific differentiated measures, as these currently differ between teachers and grades, and can be confusing for students. This is consistent with previous research that states that collaboration is crucial for creating inclusive classrooms (Hunt et al., 2002 ; Mortier et al., 2010 ; EADSNE, 2012 ; Claasen et al., 2009 ; Mitchel, 2014 ). A first step in this process is realising that collaboration is beneficial for both teachers and students (EADSNE, 2012 ).

5 Conclusion

The chapter summarizes a doctoral dissertation that started with the assumption from theory that differentiated instruction can be adopted to create more inclusive classrooms. Theories describe DI as both a teaching practice and a philosophy, but the concept is rarely measured as such. Empirical evidence about the effectiveness and operationalisation of differentiating is limited. The general aim of this research was to gain a more in-depth understanding of the concept of DI. This main aim was subdivided into two objectives. The first objective focused on how DI is perceived by teachers and resulted in the DI-Quest model. The second objective focused on how DI is implemented. Four empirical studies were conducted to address these objectives. Two different samples spread over three years were adopted (1302 teachers in study 1 and 1522 teachers in studies 2, 3 and 4) and mixed methods were applied to investigate these research goals. In this chapter the results of these studies were put next to other studies and literature about differentiation. The conclusions highlight the importance of teachers’ philosophy when it comes to implementing DI, the importance of perceiving and implementing DI as a pedagogical model and the importance and complexity of professional development with regard to DI. Overall, the authors of this dissertation conclude that DI can be as promising as theories say when it comes to creating inclusive classrooms, but at the same time their research illustrated that the reality of DI in classrooms, is far more complex than the theories suggest.

Bade, J., & Bult, H. (1981). De praktijk van interne differentiatie. Handboek voor de leraar . Uitgeverij Intro Nijkerk.

Google Scholar  

Bearne, E. (2006). Differentiation and diversity in the primary school . Routledge.

Beecher, M., & Sweeny, S. M. (2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and differentiation: One school’s story. Journal of Advanced Academica, 19 (3), 502–530.

Article   Google Scholar  

Claasen, W., de Bruïne, E., Schuman, H., Siemons, H. & van Velthooven, B. (2009). Inclusief bekwaam. Generiek competentieprofiel inclusief onderwijs - LEOZ Deelproject 4 . Garant.

Brighton, C. M., Hertberg, H. L., Moon, T. R., Tomlinson, C. A., & Callahan, C. M. (2005). The feasibility of high-end learning in a diverse middle school . National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Coubergs, C., Struyven, K., Engels, N., Cools, W., & De Martelaer, K. (2013). Binnenklasdifferentiatie. Leerkansen voor alle leerlingen . Acco.

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

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

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

EADSNE (European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education). (2012). Lerarenopleiding en inclusie. Profiel van inclusieve leraren . European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education.

Endal, G., Padmadewi, N., & Ratminingsih, M. (2013). The effect of differentiated instruction and achievement motivation on students’ writing competency. Journal Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris , 1 .

Gheyssens, E. (2020). Adopting differentiated instruction to create inclusive classrooms . Crazy Copy Center Productions.

Gheyssens, E., Consuegra, E., Vanslambrouck, S., Engels, N., & Struyven, K. (2020a). Differentiated instruction in practice: Do teachers walk the talk? Pedagogische Studieën, 97 , 163–186.

Gheyssens, E., Consuegra, E., Engels, N., & Struyven, K. (2020b). Good things come to those who wait: The importance of professional development for the implementation of differentiated instruction. Frontiers in Education, 5 , 96.

Gheyssens, E., Coubergs, C., Griful-Freixenet, J., Engels, N., & Struyven, K. (2020c). Differentiated instruction: The diversity of teachers’ philosophy and practice to adapt teaching to students’ interests, readiness and learning profiles. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26 , 1383.

Gheyssens, E., Consuegra, E., Engels, N., & Struyven, K. (2021). Creating inclusive classrooms in primary and secondary schools: From noticing to differentiated practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 100 , 103210.

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75 (1), 27–61.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement . Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18 (1), 20–35.

Keay, J. K., & Lloyd, C. M. (2011). Developing inclusive approaches to learning and teaching. In J. K. Keay & C. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Linking children’s learning with professional learning. Impact, evidence and inclusive practice (pp. 31–44). Sense Publishers.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Latz, A. O., & Adams, C. M. (2011). Critical differentiation and the twice oppressed: Social class and giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34 (5), 773–789.

Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Norland, J. J., Berkeley, S., McDuffie, K., Tornquist, E. H., & Connors, N. (2006). Differentiated curriculum enhancement in inclusive middle school science effects on classroom and high-stakes tests. The Journal of Special Education, 40 (3), 130–137.

Merchie, E., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2016). Evaluating teachers’ professional development initiatives: Towards an extended evaluative framework. Research Papers in Education, 33 , 1–26.

Mitchel, D. (2014). What really works in special and inclusive education. Using evidence-based teaching strategies (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Mortier, K., Van Hove, G., & De Schauwer, E. (2010). Supports for children with disabilities in regular education classrooms: An account of different perspectives in Flanders. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14 (6), 543–561.

Op ‘t Eynde. (2004). Leren doe je nooit alleen: differentiatie als een sociaal gebeuren. Impuls, 35 (1), 4–13.

Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M., & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The effects of differentiated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48 (2), 462–501.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and Well-being. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68.

Smale-Jacobse, A. E., Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M., & Maulana, R. (2019). Differentiated instruction in secondary education: A systematic review of research evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 2366.

Sousa, D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2011). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience supports the learner – Friendly classroom . Solution Tree Press.

Tobin, R. (2006). Five ways to facilitate the teacher assistant’s work in the classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 2 (6), n6.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom. Responding to the needs of all learners . ASCD.

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

Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Grading and differentiation: Paradox or good practice? Theory Into Practice, 44 (3), 262–269.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners . ASCD.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms . ASCD.

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

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27 (2/3), 119–145.

Valiandes, S. (2015). Evaluating the impact of differentiated instruction on literacy and reading in mixed ability classrooms: Quality and equity dimensions of education effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 45 , 17–26.

van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2007). School and classroom practices in inclusive education in Australia. Childhood Education, 83 (6), 390–394.

Vanderhoeven, J. L. (2004). Positief omgaan met verschillen in de leeromgeving. Een visie op differentiatie en gelijke kansen in authentieke middenscholen . Uitgeverij Antwerpen.

Whitburn, J. (2001). Effective classroom organisation in primary schools: Mathematics. Oxford Review of Education, 27 (3), 411–428.

Willegems, V., Consuegra, E., Struyven, K., & Engels, N. (2016). How to become a broker: The role of teacher educators in developing collaborative teacher research teams. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22 (3–4), 173–193.

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

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Esther Gheyssens

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Aalst, Belgium

Esther Gheyssens, Júlia Griful-Freixenet & Katrien Struyven

Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Júlia Griful-Freixenet

Universiteit Hasselt, Hasselt, Belgium

Katrien Struyven

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esther Gheyssens .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Teacher Education, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Ridwan Maulana

Michelle Helms-Lorenz

Department of Education, University of York, York, UK

Robert M. Klassen

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Gheyssens, E., Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K. (2023). Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Establish Effective Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms. In: Maulana, R., Helms-Lorenz, M., Klassen, R.M. (eds) Effective Teaching Around the World . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31678-4_30

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31678-4_30

Published : 28 June 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-31677-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-31678-4

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Browse By Category
• View ALL Lessons
• Submit Your Idea
• Shop Lesson Books
• Search our Lessons
• Browse All Assessments
• New Assessments
• Paper & Pencil Assessments
• Alternative Assessments
• Student Assessments
• View Kids Work
• Submit Your Ideas
• Browse All Best Practices
• New Best Practices
• How BPs Work
• Most Popular
• Alphabetical
• Submit Your Best Practice
• Browse All Prof. Dev.
• Online PD Courses
• Onsite Workshops
• Hall of Shame
• Becoming a PE Teacher
• PE Articles
• Defending PE
• Substitute Guidelines
• Online Classes
• PE Research
• Browse All Boards
• Board of the Week
• Submit Your Bulletin Board
• Browse All Class Mngt
• Lesson Ideas
• New Teacher Tips
• Reducing Off-Task Behavior
• Browse All Videos
• Find Grants
• Kids Quote of the Week
• Weekly Activities
• Advertise on PEC
• FREE Newsletter

PE Central has partnered with S&S Discount Sports to provide a full range of sports and PE products for your program.

Get Free Shipping plus 15% OFF on orders over $59! Use offer code B4260. Shop Now!

• Shop Online Courses:
• Classroom Management
• Integrating Literacy & Math
• Grad Credit
• All PE Courses

• Cooperative Fitness Challenge
• Cooperative Skills Challenge
• Log It (Activity Tracker)

• Instant Activities
• Grades 9-12
• Dance of the Month
• Special Events Menu
• Cues/Performance Tips
• College Lessons
• Search All Lessons

• Paper & Pencil Assessments
• Shop Assessment

• How BP's Work

• Shop Bulletin Board Books

• Apps for PE Main Menu
• Submit Your App
• Ask our App Expert
• Active Gaming

• What is Adapted PE
• Ask Our Expert
• Adapting Activities
• IEP Information
• Adapted Web Sites
• Shop Adapted Store

• PreK Lesson Ideas
• PreK Videos
• Homemade PreK PE Equip
• Shop PreK Books

• Shop Class Mngt Products

• Search Jobs
• Interview Questions
• Interview Tips
• Portfolio Development

• Becoming PE Teacher
• Fundraising/Grants

• New Products
• T-Shirts/Accessories
• Class Management
• Middle School
• High School
• Curriculums
• Limited Space

• Search Our Lessons

Differentiating Instruction for Students with Disabilities

Adaptations for specific activities.

General Adaptation Suggestions

PE Central Copyright 1996-2020 All Rights Reserved

PE Central 2516 Blossom Trl W Blacksburg, VA 24060 E-mail : [email protected] Phone : 540-953-1043 Fax : 540-301-0112

Copyright 1996-2016 PE Central® www.pecentral.org All Rights Reserved Web Debut : 08/26/1996

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

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

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction in Physical Education

Affiliations.

• 1 Federal University of São Carlos.
• 2 State University of New York.
• 3 University of New Hampshire.
• PMID: 31155914
• DOI: 10.1123/apaq.2018-0145

The aim of this case study was to describe the distinct approaches used by physical education (PE) teachers to accommodate students with disabilities in New York elementary school PE classes. The participants included 1 adapted PE specialist, 5 PE teachers, and 5 elementary school students with various impairments. Through thematic analysis, observations and interviews revealed 3 main approaches: (a) normalized instruction-traditional curriculum with no differentiation in the program; (b) differentiated instruction-adaptations tailored specifically to the needs of each student with disability; and (c) universally designed instruction based on the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and accessibility to all students. Differentiated instruction, entailing modifications in the program and pedagogical accommodations, was the most prevalent approach at the research site, but lessons based on UDL principles were also observed. In association, the 2 approaches (differentiated instruction and UDL) represented significant resources to accommodate students with disabilities in PE.

Keywords: curricular modifications; inclusion; instruction approaches; students with disabilities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Analysing Italian Inclusive Education Practices in Relation to Universal Design for Learning Principles. Pagliara SM, Sanchez Utge M, Bonavolontà G, Mura A. Pagliara SM, et al. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2023 Aug 23;306:511-516. doi: 10.3233/SHTI230670. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2023. PMID: 37638956
• Application of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Principles to Surgical Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Dickinson KJ, Gronseth SL. Dickinson KJ, et al. J Surg Educ. 2020 Sep-Oct;77(5):1008-1012. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.06.005. Epub 2020 Jun 5. J Surg Educ. 2020. PMID: 32576451 Free PMC article. Review.
• The Universal Design for Learning Framework in Anatomical Sciences Education. Balta JY, Supple B, O'Keeffe GW. Balta JY, et al. Anat Sci Educ. 2021 Jan;14(1):71-78. doi: 10.1002/ase.1992. Epub 2020 Jul 16. Anat Sci Educ. 2021. PMID: 32539206
• Use of Universal Design for Learning Principles in a Public Health Course. Casebolt T, Humphrey K. Casebolt T, et al. Ann Glob Health. 2023 Jul 21;89(1):48. doi: 10.5334/aogh.4045. eCollection 2023. Ann Glob Health. 2023. PMID: 37484884 Free PMC article.
• Universal design for learning in anatomy education of healthcare students: A scoping review. Dempsey AMK, Lone M, Nolan YM, Hunt E. Dempsey AMK, et al. Anat Sci Educ. 2023 Jan;16(1):10-26. doi: 10.1002/ase.2160. Epub 2022 Feb 24. Anat Sci Educ. 2023. PMID: 34862859 Review.
• Differentiated Instruction as a Viable Framework for Meeting the Needs of Diverse Adult Learners in Health Professions Education. Colbert CY, Foshee CM, Prelosky-Leeson A, Schleicher M, King R. Colbert CY, et al. Med Sci Educ. 2023 Jun 28;33(4):975-984. doi: 10.1007/s40670-023-01808-w. eCollection 2023 Aug. Med Sci Educ. 2023. PMID: 37546185 Free PMC article.
• The influence of speed and strength training at school on the indicators of attention switching in children aged 13-14 years with different typologies. Polevoy GG. Polevoy GG. J Educ Health Promot. 2022 Jan 31;11:23. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_413_21. eCollection 2022. J Educ Health Promot. 2022. PMID: 35281404 Free PMC article.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Sheridan PubFactory

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

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