1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Background of the Study As the years go by, the field of education sees the introduction of new research and teaching techniques. Research demonstrates that there are numerous ways for students to learn in addition to novel teaching methods. It's crucial for educators to develop alongside their students and learn how to keep them interested in the material being taught. Finding out how students learn best and designing lessons and activities around that knowledge is one way to achieve this (Hall, 2021). Teachers are asked to perform the extremely challenging task of teaching the exact same content to the point of proficiency for each student as classrooms become more diverse and test scores and scoring proficiency become more significant. Without leaving any student intellectually behind, teachers are expected to teach content to a diverse population of students with a range of prior knowledge, interests, and language proficiency (McMackin & Witherell, 2005). Although teachers have yearned for decades for more responsive and effective methods in addressing students' differences, many children perform daily on the ‘margins' of their classrooms - never fully engaged and rarely ever catching a glimpse of their brightest potential, according to Anderson (2007), who sums up the sentiment among teachers. Teachers can improve student engagement and motivation by designing lessons and activities that take their students' intelligences into account (Winarti et al., 2019). The researcher decided to concentrate on differentiated instruction by developing differentiated learning activities that resulted in differentiated products that were tailored 2 to students' learning intelligences in order to increase engagement and motivation in her own classroom. For this study, there were two groups: one group received instruction with no differentiation built into the learning activities, meaning every student turned in the same final product. The other group received instruction with differentiation built into the learning activities. For example, rather than having every student create a PowerPoint presentation and present it to the class, there were differentiated product options for students to choose from. This group of students was given differentiation options that catered to their learning intelligences. These available products were connected to the different learning intelligences and included products such as presentations, songs, or creating a piece of art. Additionally, students of this generation do not simply want to sit around all day listening to their teachers giving lectures. In fact, two out of three students report feeling bored in class, according to a 2007 article by Bryner in Live Science. Thirty percent of these students cited a lack of interaction as the cause, while seventy percent cited the use of uninteresting report materials in the classroom. Because of this, it is essential for teachers to differentiate their instruction by changing the content, procedure, or products (Tomlinson et. Al., 2003). But prior to that, they must profile what kind of learning styles their learners have (Teach.com, 2018). Identifying the learning styles of students in school is considered as a teacher’s responsibility (Shenoy & Shenoy, 2013). Profiling them enables the teacher to gain a better outlook on how learners obtain information. Also, being knowledgeable about the learning styles at educational institutes helps solve learning problems among students and allows students to become better learners (Sarabi, Asiabar, Jafari, Sadeghifar, 3 Tofighi, Zaboli, Peyman & Shams, 2014). Even if identifying the learning style is a complicated issue, several models have been proposed by different authors in order to categorize each style (García, Amandi, Schiaffino, and Campo, 2007). One of those models was the famous VAK (Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic) Model of Neil Flemming in 2001. Other models identified by The Peak Performance Center (n.d.), an organization that provides resources to organization to achieve performance excellence, are the 4MAT Learning Style Model, Gregoric Mind Style Model, Kob Learning Style Model, Honey Mumford Learning Style, Felder-Silverman Learning Style, Hermann’s Brain Dominance (HBDI), Left brain and Right-brain Preference, and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). All these models have various assumptions and focus on different aspects (García, et al., 2007). Therefore, profiling of learning styles benefited teachers by gaining a clearer perspective on the proper implementation of instruction and teaching techniques in class (Teach.com, 2018; Hylton, 2017). Learning style is very important in a differentiated classroom and fits into many aspects of teaching and learning. Besides having students choose how they want to complete an assignment based on the learning styles (written, report, poster, diagram, etc.), a lesson may be presented using a variety of learning styles. For our reading lesson, students may read independently or listen to the story on tape, work in groups or alone. The teacher may use the overhead, read with the lights dim, or play music in the background. For tactile and visual learners the teacher may pass props around that are related to the story for the students to see and touch. By using multiple instructional 4 techniques, a teacher can connect better with the student’s preferred way of learning, bringing about greater engagement and active participation in the lesson. In order to increase classroom engagement as as well as to meet their preferred learning styles, it is important to update and fit teaching methods and evaluate their learning instruction. Thus, in this light the study will be conducted. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework One educational theory that supports differentiated instruction is the constructivist learning theory. Constructivism is an “approach to education…in which learners actively create, interpret, and reorganize knowledge in individual ways” (Shah, 2019). Knowledge is explored and created by the learner through exploration and discussion. According to constructivist theory, a teacher's role is to "spur students' enthusiasm, motivation, and independence so that they are actively involved in the learning process" (Ndia et al., 2020). Teachers help students "construct knowledge rather than reproduce a series of facts" (Shah, 2019). The student is the focal point of education and learning. As a result, multiple intelligence theory (Karaduman & Cihan, 2018) is another theory that supports differentiated instruction. Using various instructional methods caters to each student and allows students to construct knowledge on their own with the assistance of a teacher. This study is built on the theoretical foundation of students with multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) and diverse learning styles (Carbo, 1984). Gardner defines multiple intelligences as the various ways in which people learn and process information. Multiple intelligences are classified into eight categories: verbal-linguistic, logicalmathematical, visual-spatial, musical, kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and 5 naturalist. Learning styles, according to Carbo, are the approach and preferences of learners in the classroom when new information is taught and practiced. Learning styles refer to how students effectively absorb information, the environment in which they learn, and the method by which information is then reproduced to demonstrate learning. If students learn information in different ways, teachers should present and assess what is taught in different ways based on those different intelligences and learning styles. Teachers must be able to teach the necessary content while ensuring the success of each individual student in the classroom, using various strategies for how students will learn content and what they will use to teach content. Through the use of multiple intelligences and different learning styles all students will have a chance to see themselves succeed in school which should lead to an increase in motivation. Differentiating instruction, through the use of a variety of motivational strategies, activities, and assessments, builds upon these ideas of multiple intelligences and learning styles while staying faithful to all students with the same curricular goals and mastery of the same content standards. In fact, differentiating of instruction was already proven to consistently yield positive results (McQuarrie, McRae, & Stack-Cutler, 2008). It ensures all types of learners, with varied learning styles, challenged. Furthermore, it provides struggling readers to become self-sufficient, confident, and competent individuals, and increases students’ academic performance than those exposed in a traditional lecture method (Aranda & Zamora, 2016; Leonardo, Nivera, & Reyes, 2015; Ferrier, 2007; Tieso, 2005). It is also important because students process and acquire information in various ways such 6 as seeing and hearing, as well as reflection and action, thought, analysis and imagination (Jacques and Salmon, 2006). For the arguments presented, differentiating the instruction can be better executed by identifying first the preferred learning styles of students (Othman & Amiruddin, 2010). Despite gaining ground in many educational circles, practicing of Differentiated Instruction in class has become a challenge and had made the role of teachers complex (Tomlinson & Moon, 2014; Dixon, Yssel, McConnell, & Hardin, 2014). One of the challenges is teaching methods variation. Kauffman, Mock, Tankersley, and Landrum (2008) discussed the confusion of teachers that differentiated instruction means a oneonone instructional arrangement. Some teachers even continuously apply traditional teaching instructions such as lecture or demonstration, discovery learning, principle application, memorization, and comprehension as well. The danger is, when learning styles mismatched with teaching styles, the students may become bored, inattentive, do poorly on tests, get discouraged, and lack interest in the class. (Singh, 2015) Differentiated Instruction Classroom Engagement Students’ Learning Styles Guidelines in the Implementation of Differentiated Instruction Classroom 7 Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework Figure 1 shows the independent variable differentiated instruction and its relation towards the two dependent variables which are students’ learning styles and classroom engagement. Statement of the Problem The main purpose of this study is to examine the relationship of differentiated and students’ learning styles on classroom engagement in a Science Class. Specifically, this study aims to answer the following questions: 1. What is the prevailing learning styles of the students in terms of : 1.1 visual 1.2 auditory 1.3 kinesthetic 2. What is the level of students’ classroom engagement according to their learning exposed to differentiated instruction? 3. Do learning styles affect students’ classroom engagement? 4. Do differentiated instruction affect students’ classroom engagement? 5. Do learning styles and differentiated instruction have an interaction effect on the students’ classroom engagement? 6. Based on the findings of the study, what proposed guide in teaching Science may be developed? 8 Hypotheses Below is the hypothesis that will be tested: 1. The differentiated instruction does not affect students classroom engagement. 2. Learning styles and differentiated instruction don’t have an interaction effect on the students’ classroom engagement. Significance of the Study The findings of this study will provide deeper and more valuable insights on how learning style and teaching strategies can help improve students’ classroom engagement and can be made easier and more meaningful to the following: Students. The findings of this study may help students improve learning lassroom engagement in a Science class. Teachers. The study's findings may promote the improvement of teachers' instructional strategies and the development of students' learning styles in order to raise students' classroom engagement in a Science Class. Administrators. The results of this study may be helpful to administrators in establishing a clearer image of the efficacy of upgrading instructors' teaching methods and enhancing students' learning styles. Researchers. This study may serve as a take-off point that will lead them to the path of discovering related challenges rooted in the findings of this research and the possible solutions that will remedy those difficulties obtaining improved Science Academic Achievement in general. 9 Scope and Delimitation The main purpose of this study is to examine the relationship of differentiated and students’ learning styles on classroom engagement in a Science Class. The conduct of the study will be allotting one (1) quarter to observe the validity and reliability of the result. The researcher limited the problem into giving strategic learning –differentiated instruction in the teaching process which was appropriate to the defined curriculum. Definition of Terms The following terms were used in the context of this study: Classroom Engagement. This-refers to the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught, which extends to the level of motivation they have to learn and progress in their education. Differentiated Instruction. This means tailoring instruction to meet individual needs. Whether teachers differentiate content, process, products, or the learning environment, the use of ongoing assessment and flexible grouping makes this a successful approach to instruction. Learning Styles. This refers to the attitudes and feelings of students toward the Science. Learning style can also be described as a set of factors, behaviors, and attitudes that facilitate learning for an individual in a given situation. Styles influence how students learn, how teachers teach, and how the two interact (O’Brien’s, 1985). 10 Visual. Visual learners absorb information primarily by seeing it, or by visualising it mentally. Auditory. Auditory learners absorb information primarily by hearing it. Kinesthetic. Kinesthetic learners absorb information primarily through movement in a physical way. 11 Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE This chapter consists of a review of the 1) conceptual literature and 2) research literature that were found to be relevant to the present study. Conceptual Literature Differentiated Instruction. Differentiated teaching refers to the methods used by teachers to broaden the knowledge and skills of all students in every classroom, regardless of their starting point. The goal is to improve the performance of all students, including those who are falling behind and those who are performing above year level expectations. Differentiated instruction is the pedagogical approach of teachers who approach teaching and learning in a creative and flexible manner. Individualized student information, combined with learning data, can be used to identify what students already know, what they should learn next, and gaps in their knowledge and skills for targeted learning intervention. Data can also help teachers make decisions about a student's Individual Education Plan (IEP). Data allows teachers to create well-scaffolded learning pathways for all students to follow. Learning is optimized when teachers pitch the content and the instruction ‘at or just above’ each student’s developmental level, considered to be their ‘zone of proximal development’ (Vygotsky 1978). Differentiated teaching provides the right level of challenge and promotes engagement by responding to each student’s individual differences in readiness, interest and learning profile. 12 Differentiation benefits students across the learning continuum, including students who are highly able and gifted. The most effective differentiation practices focus on all aspects of teaching: content, process, product and learning environment. Individualized student information, combined with learning data, can be used to identify what students already know, what they should learn next, and gaps in their knowledge and skills for targeted learning intervention. Data can also help teachers make decisions about a student's Individual Education Plan (IEP). Data allows teachers to create well-scaffolded learning pathways for all students to follow. Differentiation also describes provision of reasonable adjustments for students with learning difficulties, including disabilities (see the Disability Standards for Education). Adjustments should take account of student knowledge and skills, and what they need to learn next based on the Victorian curriculum achievement standards. Adjustments can include individualised and small group targeted learning interventions for some students when learning gaps are evident. Learning Styles. Differentiated instruction is the responsibility of teachers in their own classrooms. While many teachers intend to differentiate their classrooms, many struggle with how to put the strategies into action. Some teachers believe they do not have enough time to use differentiated instructional strategies, so they use them sparingly (Onyishi & Sefotho, 2020). According to a Maryland study, there is a significant gap between the desire to implement differentiated instruction and actual classroom practices (Hersi & Bal, 2021). 13 This study then looked at previous studies and discovered these results are similar and not just limited to one “county, school district, or town” (Hersi & Bal, 2021, p. 67). This gap provides evidence that professional development in differentiated instruction is beneficial for teachers. If teachers were comfortable with differentiation, it would have a positive impact on teachers meaning they would implement different forms of differentiation (Bogen et al., 2019) This would help close the gap between the desire to implement in the classroom, and classrooms that actually implemented differentiated instruction. Along with teachers’ desire to use differentiated instruction strategies, students were found to prefer learning in a format that meets their needs. Parents were also found to support the idea of learning being done in ways that accommodated their child’s strengths (Ismajli & Imami-Morina, 2018). Based on this information, teachers have the support necessary to implement differentiated instruction, but in order to feel more comfortable using the strategies, they need more professional development. Because students learn in a variety of ways, matching how a student learns with teaching strategies has shown to have “a positive impact on student achievement, interest, and/or motivation” (Smith & Renzulli, 1984, p. 49). There are multiple ways to group students in flexible learning groups. In order to differentiate and group students by learning preference, teachers help students identify their learning strengths and weaknesses. There are numerous ways to discover learning preferences available for teachers to use (Smith & Renzulli, 1984) such as the multiple intelligences test, a modality assessment, and basic questionnaires can be used to determine how a student learns best. 14 When teachers differentiate based on interests, students are motivated to learn and connect with what is being taught. They are also provided with opportunities that allow for them to learn in a manner that is natural and efficient (Joseph et al., 2013). Another way of grouping students according to Diane Heacox (2012) is by performance or ability. This means students took a pretest and based on the scores, they would then be grouped by their grades (Heacox, 2012). Based on the study conducted by Allcock and Hulme (2010), “Students differentiated by ability experienced more variety as they were grouped according to aptitude for specific skills, which differed by task” (p. 76). It is important to limit the number of differentiated levels and ensure all learners have “respectful work” (Richards & Omdal, 2007, p. 426). Leveling students by high performing, baseline, and low-performing students requires a teacher to test the level of knowledge “before, during, and after the instructional period” (Richards & Omdal, 2007, p. 428) to ensure students are placed in the proper flexible learning groups. This also helps the teacher to target skills necessary to ensure success for all students. Aside from the grouping of students, differentiation takes placed by differentiating the content, the process, and the product. When a teacher modifies how students access the material or learn, that is differentiation by content (Joseph et al., 2013). Differentiating by content means one student who struggles may focus on one resource while a gifted learner would be provided with opportunities for deeper analysis (Tapper & Horsley, 2017). When differentiating by process, teachers tier by level of complexity; they also provide various ways for students to work and create depending on their preferred way of learning (Joseph et al., 2013). These are activities that allow students to 15 understand the topic, and they are varied in how students explore the content. Lastly, product differentiation is focused on assessments students complete to demonstrate their knowledge and skills after instruction (Joseph et al., 2013). Classroom Engagement. Student engagement can be defined as how interested students are in their classes and their learning. Successful instruction is indicated by how connected students appear to be in what they are learning (Groccia, 2018). Students who are engaged and motivated in their learning tend to appear as though they are concentrating, are more involved in their learning, and appear to demonstrate positive emotions and effort (Groccia, 2018). Student motivation focuses on how students work to complete the task at hand and check their own progress; students self-assess to know when they are learning and how much effort they need to use to complete the task assigned (McMillan & Hearn, 2008). Research Literature Differentiated instruction is a teaching philosophy based on the belief that because students vary, so should teaching, instruction, and assessment (Tomlinson, 1999). It is the process of changing curricula, teaching methods, learning activities, and assessments to meet students' learning needs and thus help them to be able to learn, be motivated to learn, and learn effectively (Chamberlin & Powers, 2010). Teachers must essentially consider who they are teaching and, as a result, adjust what they are teaching (Smit & Humpert, 2012). According to Hall (2002), "the intent of differentiating instruction is to maximize each student's growth and individual success by meeting each student where he or she is and assisting in the learning process." 16 According to Pham's (2012) research, learners can be classified into three types: visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. He did, however, discover that "there is no relationship between learning style classifications and memory performance." For example, when receiving visual modes of delivery, visual learners did not outperform auditory and kinesthetic learners" (p.15). "Teachers should, therefore, present information in the most appropriate manner based on students' backgrounds, prior knowledge, and abilities rather than learning styles," he continues. DI also includes appropriate modeling (Smit and Humpert, 2012), maintaining high expectations rather than lowering them (MacGillivray & Rueda, 2001, page 3), cooperative learning (Tobin & McInnes, 2008), and providing regular feedback to students (Pham, 2012). With all these aspects of DI, there are numerous instructional strategies for implementation. Pettig (2000) claims that there are as many as styles of DI as there are teachers, and as many outcomes as there are students. Much literature has been published about the philosophy of DI. Let us look at its impact in the classroom. Smit and Humpert (2012) observed in a study of math classes that students of classes in which DI was implemented did not perform worse on standardized achievement tests. A study by Johnsen (as cited in Subban, 2006) revealed that when student teachers differentiated the content and process, students were more engaged and interested. Not only were these results observed, but the teachers also had a rewarding experience when integrating DI. It was not specified if any particular age group benefited most, but students with special needs received more individualized instruction. 17 In their studies, Martin and Pickett (2013) detected that when students were given the opportunity to choose their own assignments and activities, a hallmark of DI, they were more motivated and engaged, and less likely to behave negatively. According to Tomlinson et al. (2003), when differentiation occurred for student readiness, benefits were seen in student achievement, study habits, social interaction, cooperation, attitude toward school, self-worth, motivation, and engagement. When instruction and activities were matched with the students’ interests, there were increases in student engagement, productivity, achievement, positive attitudes about learning, a willingness to accept challenges, self-determination, and creativity (Tomlinson et al., 2003). In conclusion, the published literature supports the impact of DI in the classroom. All the articles reviewed gave credibility to DI, suggesting that it makes a positive difference in the classroom for both the students and teachers. Whether the articles insinuated that the impact would be large or small – for various reasons – all made the same claim in the end: DI works. It has been shown to improve test scores for low- and high-achieving students, and promote student growth in a multitude of ways including student engagement, productivity, self-determination, creativity, and a positive attitude. Differentiated instruction can make an impact in student perceptions, engagement, and learning. It “is successful because it is squarely rooted in student engagement plus student understanding” (Tomlinson, 2005). 18 Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter describes the research methodology used in this study. Information is presented in separate sections on research design, research environment, research participants, instruments, procedure and statistical treatment of the data. Research Design The factorial experimental research design will be used in the study. This design refers to an experimental design that consists of two or more factors between subjects, with each factor having multiple discrete possible values or “levels”. The design aims to determine whether there is a significant effect between students’ learning styles and differentiated instruction as the independent variables on students’ classroom engagement as study’s dependent variable. Research Environment The study will be conducted at the Leyte Agro Industrial School, Leyte Leyte. The test will be given at Grade 12- Carrot classroom which is a well-designed, adequately ventilated and conducive for learning. The students will be arranged accordingly in their seating arrangement where they are most comfortable to observe the validity and reliability of the collected data. 19 Research Participants The participants of the study will be the Leyte Agro Industiral School students of Grade 12 - Carrot section composing fourth one (41) students. They are enrolled in the subject General Biology of SY 2022-2023. These participants will be selected through universal sampling technique. Research Instrument To gather the data for the study, a Students’ Science Engagement Scale (SSES) which will be utilized to describe the level of engagement of students in the learning process. Furthermore, the instrument of the study will be in the intermediate level to assure the suitability of the level to the chosen participants. The directions of the instrument went through revision considering that its format was patterned to be . The data to be utilized for the study will be the validated survey scores of O’Brien (1985). On the other hand, the scoring key was provided where the ratings assigned for each test item were indicated. The sum of each learning style statements will be determined by the learning style of the students through answering the questionnaire. Procedure The procedure was carried out in three (3) stages, namely: 1) pre-intervention; 2) intervention; and 3) post-intervention. Pre-intervention. The pretest will be conducted to the groups right after the reliability test of the pilot-tested instrument that will be approved by the College of 20 Graduate Studies (CGS). The conduct of the study will be given on the same day. The students will be given the copy of the test. They will be instructed to finish the test in one hour. To ensure that the students followed the instruction, answers will be strictly retrieved after the allotted time. Answer sheets during the pre-test will be checked by the subject teacher. Then, the researcher gets the average scores of the students. The scores serve as indicators of the students’ initial test scores. Intervention. After administering the pretest, the researcher will now administer the experiment exposing the experimental to their assigned learning styles. There will be series of activities that expose the groups the three learning styles. Then, the class will continue with the next teaching material and the process of intervention continues. Post-intervention. Lastly, the researcher will give the same test which was given earlier to the students. Again, they will be told to answer it for one hour. The subject teacher who checked the said test. The average scores served as measures of the post test of the students. Statistical Treatment of Data In scoring the classroom engagementt of the students, the formula of getting the range of scores will be used, where the highest possible score will be 40 and the lowest possible score will be 0. 21 The frequency distribution of the students’ test ability scores will be categorized into five levels: excellent, very good, good, fair, and poor. The distribution will be calculated based on the initial mean and standard deviation. The mean will be used to determine the students’ initial and final test and standard deviation will be used to determine how dispersed the distribution has been. To test if there will be a significant difference between the pretest and the posttest scores of each group, the t-test for dependent correlated samples will be used. To determine if there will be a significant difference in the classroom engagement test of the two groups, the t-test for independent samples and the level of significance will be tested using ∝ = 0.05 . Ethical Considerations The following contribute to the research objectives and strengthen the values required for the entire research project, such as mutual respect and fairness between the researcher and the participants. The researcher's focus is on minimizing harm and maximizing benefits. Participants in the study are expected to benefit, particularly in terms of their academic performance in science. The researcher emphasizes the importance of human dignity. a commitment to respecting each participant's autonomy, treating them with dignity, and allowing for informed consent. Researchers emphasize honesty and avoid lying. The justice principle addresses the distribution of research costs and benefits. In other words, the researcher ensured that research participants received fair and equal benefits in accordance with reasonable, non-exploitative, and well-considered procedures. The researcher gave focus 22 to the transparency of the study. At its most basic, it is accentuated that the presentation and dissemination of findings will be explicit, clear, and open about the methods and procedures used. Moreover, the researcher is required to prevent disclosure of information that could be used to identify respondents, in the absence of specific and explicit informed consent allowing the researcher to disclose such information. 23 REFERENCES Allcock, S. J., Hulme, J.A. (2010). Learning styles in the classroom: Educational benefit or planning exercise? Psychology Teaching Review, 16(2), 67—79. Bogen, E., Schlendorf, C. P., Nicolino, P. A., & Morote, E. (2019). Instructional strategies in differentiated instruction for systemic change. Journal for Leadership and Instruction, 18(2), 18—22. Brualdi, A. (1998). Gardner’s theory. Teacher Librarian, 26(2), 26. Cimermanová, I. (2018). The effect of learning styles on academic achievement in different forms of teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 219—232. Groccia, J. E. (2018). What is student engagement? New Directions for Teaching & Learning, (154), 11– 20. https://doi-org.trmproxy.mnpals.net/10.1002/tl.20287 Halif, M. M., Hassan, N., Sumardi, N. A., Omar, A. S., Ali, S. Aziz, R. A. Majid, A. A., & Salleh, N. F. (2020). Moderating effects of student motivation on the relationship between learning styles and student engagement. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(2). Hall, S. (2021). Demographic Meeting March 2021. Kindred Public School District. Kindred; Kindred High School. Retrieved October 24, 2021, from http://www.kindred.k12.nd.us/files/2021/03/KPS-State-of-the-District-March2021- Presentation.pdf. Heacox, D. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach all learners. Free Spirit Publishing. Hersi, A. A., & Bal, I. A. (2021). Planning for differentiation: Understanding Maryland teachers’ desired and actual use of differentiated instruction. Educational Planning, 28(1), 55—71. Ismajli, H., & Imami-Morina, I. (2018). Differentiated instruction: Understanding and applying interactive strategies to meet the needs of all the students. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 207—218. Itd. (n.d.). Kindred High School. ND Insight. Retrieved October 24, 2021, from https://insights.nd.gov//Education/School/Summary/0900249343. Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., & Ramsook, L. (2013). The impact of differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(3), 28—40. 24 Karaduman, G. B., & Cihan, H. (2018). The effect of multiple intelligence theory on students’ academic success in the subject of geometric shapes in elementary school. International Journal of Higher Education, 7(2), 227—233. Malacapay, M. C. (2019). Differentiated instruction in relation to pupils’ learning style. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 625—638. McMillan, J., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40—49. Mills, G. (2018). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Pearson Education, Inc. Ndia, L., Solihate, E., & Syahrial, Z. (2020). The effect of learning models and multiple intelligences on mathematics achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 285—302. Onyishi, C. N., & Sefotho, M. M. (2020). Teachers’ perspectives on the use of differentiated instruction in inclusive classrooms: Implication for teacher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(6), 136—150. Rayneri, L. J., Gerber, B. L. & Wiley, L. P. (2003). Gifted achievers and gifted underachievers: The impact of learning style preferences in the classroom. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14(4), 197—204. Richards, M. R. E., & Omdal, S. N. (2007). Effects of tiered instruction on academic performance in a secondary science course. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 424—453. Sener, S., & Cokcaliskan, A. (2018). An investigation between multiple intelligences and learning styles. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(2), 125—132.
