Keywords

1 Introduction

Globally, researchers are seeking solutions for how multicultural students with multiple levels of academic readiness, socio-economic status, languages, intelligences, values, religions, parent education and competences and skills can be instructed effectively (Williams et al., 2009). In South Africa, a developing country, rural schools in lower income communities are mostly multicultural, poorly resourced and characterised by ineffective teaching and learning. To address these barriers to learning and linguistic and ethnic diversity in the education system, South Africa has implemented an inclusive education policy where all people are regarded equal and provided with the same opportunities and experiences to acquire effective education (Badat & Sayed, 2014). However, the inclusive education policies do not always address students’ needs in effective education. Students (90.4%) are instructed in English as a second language (Fleisch, 2008); advantaged students who attend fee paying schools (mostly funded by parents) perform better than students from rural areas (funded by the government), who tend to drop out from school before completing Grade 12; and teachers are generally not adequately trained and equipped to apply differentiated instruction to address their students’ learning barriers (Landsberg et al., 2011). Chataika et al. (2012) point out that teachers who lack skills in how to identify students’ barriers and adjust their teaching according to diverse student needs in their classrooms impede academic progress. This is evident in the high dropout rate (60%) of South African students before completing Grade 12 (Hartnack, 2017). To address the high dropout rate, it is important that teachers should be trained and equipped with the necessary skills to create and apply differentiated instruction to accommodate diverse and individual student needs in poorly resourced schools (Brand et al., 2012).

Teachers can be considered as the main source of effective teaching and learning and application of differentiated instruction (Coe et al., 2014). Therefore, it is important to determine the extent to which secondary school teachers support students and apply differentiated instruction in their classrooms to address the needs of the increasingly multicultural body of students, particularly in South Africa. Additionally, students’ experiences and observations of teachers’ support and application of differentiated teaching practices could add value in how their needs can be addressed.

2 Literature Review

The united South African population comprises diverse religions and cultures. These multicultural groups form part of the country’s heritage, identity and culture, where the goal is to help each culture understand and respect other cultural practices and to unite all South African citizens.

Before 1993, South African education was characterised by an apartheid system in which students attended separate schools according to race (Msila, 2007). During this period, ‘Black’ schools were characterised by ineffective education; overcrowded classrooms; teacher-centred instruction; under- and unqualified teachers; inadequate resources; reduced school attendance rates of students and teachers; conflict, violence and disruptions in and around schools; and poor academic achievement. Mother tongue instruction had been the norm in African schools for the first eight years of schooling (Centre for Development and Enterprise [CDE], 2015). At that stage the majority of students wanted to be instructed in English rather than their mother tongue, unaware of the potential benefits of mother tongue development at an early age (Higgs & Van Wyk, 2007).

The post-apartheid education policies established a single education system for all national cultures, new education managers were appointed, and curricula revised (Lekgoathi, 2010). Despite these radical changes and curriculum revisions, in 2003 South Africa scored the lowest of 50 countries in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) that tested Grade 8 mathematics and science proficiency of students (Spaull, 2013). The Department of Basic Education (2013) realised that effective education commences in early childhood education, where students are instructed in ESL and not their home language. Therefore, the Annual National Assessments (ANA) were implemented in 2014 to test students’ language and numeracy skills (Department of Basic Education, 2018). The ANA tests, managed by the schools themselves, include standardised Home Language, First Additional Language and Mathematics tests and are written by all students in Grades 1 to 6 and 9. The 2013 results showed the following average percentage marks: Home Language = 44.0%, Second Home Language = 38.1% and Mathematics = 15.9% (Department of Basic Education, 2013). The tests indicated that mother tongue instruction could contribute to students’ effective learning.

Furthermore, more than two decades ago, McAdamis (2001) established that poor performing students’ test scores could be improved when employing differentiated instruction. The study also noticed that students experiencing such differentiated approaches showed more enthusiasm and motivation to learn. Equally important, a study in Iran on female students using differentiated instruction to teach vocabulary in mixed-ability classes showed a positive impact on the students’ academic performance (Alavinia & Farhady, 2012). Moreover, a study conducted in Kenya by Muthomi and Mbugua (2014) found that differentiated instruction improved secondary school students’ achievement in mathematics significantly.

Since 1991, Bourdieu and Coleman propagated that the economic, social, cultural, and political values of the country in large part determine effective education. In South Africa, the number of students excluded from the education system, socio-economic status, and availability of support structures differ from province to province, among school systems, and from community to community (UNESCO, 2003). In addition, to apply differentiated instruction successfully in multicultural schools of South Africa, it is important to understand the constitution of the educational system.

The educational system of South Africa consists of two types of schools namely independent and public schools. Public schools are state controlled and independent schools are privately governed. Most of the students attend public schools (n = 23,796), while a minority of students attend independent schools (n = 1966) due to high school fees (Statistics South Africa, 2019).

2.1 Importance of Differentiated Instruction in Effective Teaching

Various contextual factors contribute to the substandard quality of teaching in South Africa, such as frequent power outages; absenteeism of teachers; ill-equipped and large classes; teachers (12%) diagnosed with AIDS/HIV; lack of teaching and learning resources; students with insufficient reading and writing skills; multi-cultures; poverty; poor school management and leadership; lack of parental involvement in their children’s education; students’ linguistic and cultural diversity; sexual abuse of student girls – often by male school teachers; pregnancy; and inadequately trained teachers who are not always able to adapt their teaching methods and strategies effectively to students’ needs (Bernstein, 2015; Spaull, 2013).

The increasing diversity of classrooms and the inclusion of multicultural students with different learning abilities demand culturally sensitive and differentiated instruction that provides for the development of the whole individual (Anderson, 2007). In addition, Mpofu et al. (2014) emphasised the alignment of content with local cultures that includes values, beliefs, experiences, behaviours, and other characteristics of diverse cultures in achieving effective teaching and learning. The connection of new content to students’ prior learning which derives from real-life experiences is not only viewed as a cultural border crossing but also a crutch to understand new content (De Jager, 2019).

Differentiated instruction can be constructed from various theories, such as instruction responsive to students’ various interests; depiction of the readiness levels and learning profiles of students (Tomlinson, 2005); adjustment of the learning environment content, process and product for effective learning (Rock et al., 2008); supportive and adjustable teaching materials, methods and strategies that teachers use to include all students in the learning activities regardless of their differences in ability (De Jager, 2013, 2017); various ways to include different learning preferences and students’ individual interests (Anderson, 2007); and understanding how students assimilate and understand facts (Anderson, 2007). Thus, differentiation can be described as flexible but organised ways of proactively adjusting teaching and learning methods to accommodate students’ various learning preferences and needs in achieving maximum growth and development to reach their full potential.

Contrary to traditional teacher and textbook-centred learning methods, differentiated learning activities are student-centred, where the students are responsible for their own learning. Differentiated teaching allows students to engage in individualised activities and collaborative discussions among their peers. Thus, students could acquire extra assistance from their peers to solve a problem rather than using only the teacher as the sole instructor. In agreement, research of Payne et al. (2004) shows that group work assists students to engage actively, develop teamwork skills and learn new content more in depth from one another. Elaborating, Genzuk (2011) points out that teachers could apply diverse student-centred teaching strategies, which include direct instruction, hands-on activities and visual aids, to connect new content to prior knowledge that could assist students to understand the new content, and allow students to process new information at their own pace.. These strategies could allow students to process meaning to new and abstract concepts while learning at their own readiness level.

However, the application of differentiated instruction is often hindered by: teachers’ unwillingness to create differentiated activities due to a heavy workload, insufficient resources, pressure to complete a large amount of content in a limited time, teach large classes and lack sufficient training in differentiated teaching practices (Dalton et al., 2012). This results in teachers employing mostly teacher centered “talk and chalk” methods which could contribute to poor academic performance of South African students.

Moreover, Spaull (2013) points out that even though the South African education policy requires education circuit and district offices to observe, evaluate and support teachers’ teaching practices, these evaluations seldom occur. In search of a solution, Ampadu (2012) suggests that students’ views of teachers’ teaching practices could enhance effective learning as students could become more engaged in active learning when they experience that their voice is important. Wallace et al. (2016) agree that students’ perceptions of how they learn during classroom interactions are essential for effective education. In addition, Bourke and Mentis (2013) emphasise that the acknowledgement of students’ perceptions can contribute to a significant development and improvement of differentiated instruction. On the other hand, Rantanen (2012) warns that students might use the opportunity to evaluate the teacher on a more personal level, which could be biased. Göllner et al. (2018) point out that students can observe the same teacher’s classroom practices differently and could be influenced by personal preferences according to a teacher’s popularity or the manner in which they address their individual needs.

It is also found that teachers’ ratings of their classroom practices and their students’ perceptions about actual differentiated teaching practices might differ (Kunter & Baumert, 2006). Thus, two different perspectives which include students’ views as active participants in the classroom and perceptions of their teachers on the employment of diverse teaching approaches to support students, could add significantly to the development of differentiated instruction.

2.2 Aims of the Study

The aims of the study were to detect from perceptions of secondary school teachers whether they support students in applying differentiated instruction in teaching practices and to establish from students’ views whether their teachers were applying differentiated instruction.

Students’ perceptions were integrated in the study, based on research findings of Ampadu (2012), Anderson and Miller (1997), and Bansilal et al. (2010), who found that students’ evaluations of their teachers’ teaching practices proved to be reliable and viable. This is because the application of instruction methods has a significant impact on students’ learning experiences. Moreover, Feistauer and Richter (2017) indicate that very few studies are available on students’ perceptions of their teachers’ teaching practices.

Therefore, the first aim of the current study was to determine from students’ experiences how effectively their teachers employ differentiated instruction to address their learning needs. The problem is encapsulated in the following research question:

  • According to students’ experiences, how effectively are teachers applying differentiated instruction in secondary school classes?

The second aim of the study was to determine from secondary school teachers’ perceptions the extent they utilised differentiated instruction in poorly resourced schools and support their students. More specifically, this study sought to provide answers to the following question:

  • How do secondary school teachers apply differentiated instruction in their teaching practices to address students’ learning needs?

3 Methods

3.1 Procedure and Sample

Quantitative data was collected in randomly selected public secondary schools (n = 25) of the Gauteng Province in South Africa. The research included secondary school students (n = 4510) of diverse cultures and their teachers (n = 424), who all voluntarily agreed to participate in this study.

The social context of these randomly selected public secondary schools still embodies poverty, a lack of educational opportunities and resources, and overcrowded classrooms (ratio 1:40). The Gauteng Province was selected because it hosts more than 25% (14 million) of the population, although it is the smallest of nine provinces, has the highest secondary school completion rate (72%) followed by the Western Cape Province (70%), and is responsible for a third of South Africa’s income (Statistics South Africa, 2016). In addition, the Grade 12 final examination results of the Gauteng Province do not deviate significantly from other provinces.

3.2 Research Design

A quantitative approach was used, firstly, to determine secondary school students’ experiences of their teachers’ differentiated classroom practices and secondly, to establish from teachers’ perceptions to what extent they employed differentiated instruction in their classes. Questionnaires were completed by secondary school students in how they observed their teachers’ differentiated teaching practices in class. Additionally, another questionnaire was used where teachers could voice their perceptions on their teaching practices and establish to what extent they are applying differentiated instruction to support students. Questions and answers related todifferentiated instruction were purposively sampled from the ICALT3 questionnaires in finding answers to the research questions of this study. The ICALT 3 questionnaires were compiled from research studies by Danielson (2013), Pianta and Hamre (2009) and Van de Grift (2007) and tested in countries experiencing similar education challenges as South Africa (e.g. the Slovak Republic, very rural parts of Scotland, and Croatia) (Maulana et al., 2014). Previous research findings deriving from the ICALT3 questionnaires indicate the reliability and validity of the measuring instrument applied in this study..

The sampled questions (from ICALT3 student and teacher questionnaires) related to applied differentiated instruction in lessons. The aim of using two sets of questionnaires was important to detect in depth to what extent South African teachers apply differentiated instruction in the socio-context they are teaching gathered from Students’ and teachers’ views.

3.3 Procedures

Permission to conduct the research was obtained from the Gauteng Department of Basic Education, the school principals, teachers, and the parents of participating students. Students were requested to indicate the extent that their teachers’ employ differentiated teaching practice and teachers their perceptionswhen they completed the ICALT 3 questionnaires. An average of 10–15 students of each participating teacher completed the questionnaire.

The data was collected over a three-month period and the anonymity of all participants was respected. The questionnaires were completed on an optical mark recognition (OMR) form. After completing the questionnaires sampled questions (See Tables 31.1 and 31.2) relevant to differentiated instruction were analysed and discussed.

Table 31.1 Students’ perceptions of differentiated instruction in classes
Full size table
Table 31.2 Teachers’ perceptions of applied differentiated instruction in their classes
Full size table

Participants completed the questionnaires using a four-point Likert scale with the options ‘never’, ‘seldom’, ‘frequently’ and ‘often’. The responses were further grouped in ‘agree’ (‘frequently’ and ‘often’) or ‘disagree’ (‘never’, ‘seldom’) to assist the interpretation of findings. After completion of the OMR questionnaires, the data was electronically scanned and analysed. In the study descriptive research was used to explain and interpret to what extent differentiated instruction is employed in secondary school classrooms. Data obtained from the sampled questions related to differentiated instruction, was statistically analysed using the software SPSS (Version 23.0) programme and are summarised in Tables 31.1 and 31.2.

3.4 Students’ Experiences of Teachers’ Differentiated Classroom Practices

The study revealed that most of the students (56%) had been taught for at least one year by a teacher involved in this study, followed by 24.3% taught for two years by the same teacher, while only 3.5% had been taught for 0–11 months by the observed teacher. It can be concluded that most of the participants were familiar with the differentiated teaching practices of their teachers and were able to contribute valuable findings to this study.

Significant low scores reflected when teachers employed differentiated activities in class. This category revealed low positive scores for several teaching practices. The responses of students show that only 60.6% of the teachers considered what students already knew and 65.1% of teachers makes connections to what they already know. One would expect that in an inclusive multicultural teaching environment where ESL students grow up in various social contexts, teachers would connect new content to students’ prior background knowledge as they are instructed in a second language and do not always understand difficult concepts. ‘Connecting new content to students’ prior knowledge could help them to understand abstract concepts from previous experiences which could impact multicultural students’ academic success. A limited number of teachers 29.7% determined whether students understood the content, and only 36.4% of their teachers know what ‘I have difficulty with’. The results show that ESL students experience various impediments when learning new content, that their teachers are unaware of, or unable or unwilling to address, which could lead to ineffective learning and poor academic achievement.

The poor academic performance of South African students in the ANA tests and other international tests may be connected to the low differentiated instruction results. The reasons could possibly be attached to teachers that: teach large class sizes, do not know their students’ needs, do not have sufficient time to establish if all students understood the content and could be afraid of possible disciplinary problems that may occur when engaging with specific students to establish if they understood the content of the lesson.

In agreement with Landsberg et al. (2011), it can be concluded that most teachers are not effectively trained and equipped on how to include multicultural students’ needs using differentiated instruction. Moreover, the results could also be linked to teachers’ inability to address students’ individual needs and not necessary in how teachers adapt their teaching practices in general for the whole class.

3.5 Teachers’ Perceptions of Applied Differentiated Instruction in their Classrooms

The participating secondary school teachers (male: 49.5% and female: 50.5%) showed diverse teaching experience ranging from less than five years (21%) to above 30 years (5%). Most of them (45%) taught science subjects (i.e. Mathematics, Physical Sciences and Life Sciences), and the remaining 55% included non-science subjects (i.e. Accounting, Business Studies, Computer Application, Economics, Geography, Language, Life Orientation and Management Sciences).

Respondents ‘agreed’ that they: explained content in different ways (97%); used various approaches so that students could understand content (95%); ‘make time to support them with extra help’ (91%); ‘have to guide students step by step when executing the activities’ (79%); ‘cannot tell if students are keeping up with the me’ (71%); ‘sometimes I feel I cannot assist all students when they need me’ (65%); ‘create various learning activities that students can choose from’ (63%); ‘show students different ways of how to solve a problem’ (58%); ‘cannot allow students in this class to work on their own’ (56%).

It can be concluded that the teacher participants were unsure whether they could allow their students to work on their own in class activities (44% ‘agreed’ and 56% ‘disagreed’), some teachers showed their students alternative ways of how to solve a problem (58% ‘agreed’), while others did not (42% ‘disagreed’); most teachers agreed that they could not assist all students when they needed them (65%), while (35%) felt that they could.

4 Key Findings

Students’ experiences of their teachers’ differentiated teaching practices are important for improving effective teaching and learning (Ampadu, 2012). Although students are not trained in how to teach effectively, their observations (if not biased) contributed to valuable information in this study.

Interesting discrepancies were detected when students’ observations of their teachers’ classroom practices were compared with their teachers’ perceptions on the employment of differentiated instruction in classes. Teachers (91%) indicated that they made time to support their students with extra help, 95% reflected that they used another approach if students did not comprehend the lesson and 97% of the teachers agreed that they explained in different ways if students did not understand the content. However, contradicting teachers’ perceptions, only 29.7% students indicated that their teachers ‘check whether they understood the content of the lesson’, most students (61%) felt that their teachers did not know what they have ‘difficulty with’ and 67.8% do not ‘check whether I have understood the content of the lesson’. Although teachers (97%) feel they sufficiently explain content in diverse ways to students they might not be able to establish if all students have grasped the content, due to large and overcrowded classes and a curriculum that needs to be completed in a limited timeframe (CDE, 2015). This finding is in agreement with previous studies who found that teachers are not always able to identify their learners’ barriers and do not know whether their students understand the new content. This is confirmed by the teachers’ (71%) responses, which indicated that they could not tell whether students were keeping up with them.

In addition, 60.6% students agreed that teachers take in account what they already know and 65.1% agreed that teachers make connections to what they already know. The importance of connecting new content to students’ prior learning which they obtained from real-life experiences is important to make connections to new content and understand concepts from a multicultural perspective (De Jager, 2019; Mpofu et al., 2014). Connections to prior knowledge could assist students to understand abstract concepts and contribute to effective differentiated instruction.

Moreover, 65% of the teachers felt they could not assist all students when they needed them, this is in align with students’ observations that showed only 36.4% teachers actually know what difficulties they experience in class. On the other hand, Schwab et al. (2018) claim that students often tend to rate their teachers according to their ability to address their personal and individual needs and not for diverse teaching methods and strategies they employ in class to assist them with learning difficulties.

Responses of teachers (56%) showed that not all supplemented their lessons with group work. This could lead to not all students to engage actively in classes and learn new content more in depth (Payne et al., 2004). The reason could be that overcrowded classes could cause disciplinary problems and teachers want to avoid this. The other challenge could be that teachers teach large classes but not all students do have a seating place due to a lack of infrastructure in poorly resourced public schools.

To engage students actively in class, Genzuk (2011) suggests that teachers use various student-centred teaching strategies, which include self-regulated learning and explicit and implicit direct instruction, such as visual aids and hands-on activities, to connect meaning to content, and allow sufficient time for students to process new information at their own pace.

The results and previous studies indicate that education requires an intensive in-service training programme for teachers (Nel & Müller, 2010). These training programmes need to be in a specialised pedagogy such as differentiated instruction to support and improve students’ academic learning. Thus, a continuous professional development programme which includes feedback from students’ evaluations is essential for equipping teachers on how to apply differentiated instruction in improving their instruction strategies.

In addition, a solution for the effective multicultural teaching of ESL students (without lowering standards and students’ expectations) could be for teachers to employ differentiated instruction, adapt teaching and assessment methods, and allow students to work interactively at their own pace according to their various learning preferences in achieving the lesson objectives.

5 Conclusion

Contradicting observations and perceptions show that teachers are not always aware of what students’ needs are in the classroom and what their challenges are in effective learning. The possible explanation could be inadequate training of teachers to identify students’ learning barriers and to create and implement differentiated activities or students evaluating teachers according to their popularity and ability to address their individual needs rather than evaluating them on classroom practices. In addition, teachers encounter various impediments that prevent them from applying differentiated instruction. These could include teaching ESL students, a lack of time to complete the curriculum, lack of resources, large classes, and an inability to manage and maintain discipline in class. Although the creation of differentiated activities may be time consuming, as with any instructional practice, fluency comes with experience. The author believes that if time and effective training were devoted to the creation of differentiated activities, less time would eventually be devoted to repeating content resulting from non-differentiated instruction. Additionally, education districts and circuit offices need to evaluate and support teachers’ teaching practices (Spaull, 2013).

A follow-up study is important to establish whether in-service training workshops for teachers in public schools could improve the implementation of differentiated instruction despite the challenges they experience. Since the responses of this study represent only public secondary schools of South Africa, it is recommended that a follow-up study using the same teachers’ classes should be conducted and the findings of the two studies compared to eliminate possible biased evaluations and enhance the validity of students’ evaluations and teachers’ perceptions.

This study shows some limitations. Besides for students’ observations and teachers’ perceptions on related differentiated instruction questions (sampled from the ICALT3 questionnaire), student achievement was not measured. Standardised tests to establish students’ effective learning could add value to this study in establishing teachers’ effective differentiated teaching practices. Additionally, this study was executed on a voluntarily basis. The participating teachers and students were only representative of public schools in the Gauteng Province and not of public schools in other provinces. Therefore, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results to broader South African contexts.