THESIS ABSTRACT
This paper presents the results of the study concerning the application of differentiated instruction in heterogeneous classes, in which 71 learners participated. Thirty-five out of 71 learners were grouped by learning styles (auditory, kinesthetic, and visual) by administering Learning Style Inventory. The study provides evidence about the effect that systematic differentiated instruction in heterogeneous classes has on students’ achievement. The results of the experimental group of the research that received differentiated instruction were compared with the results of the control group that did not receive differentiated instruction. The comparison of the two groups aimed at investigating the difference in achievement. Along with the main research question determining the impact of differentiated teaching on students’ achievement, result of the research gave substantial evidence over the dimensions of quality and equity of education effectiveness that, in mixed ability classrooms differentiated instruction can promote equity and quality for all. Teachers will use Learning Style Inventory to differentiate instruction to accommodate the learning needs of all students.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:
1. Comparability of participants by sex learner-respondents
Based on the result there were 19 or 52.78% male learner-respondents in the control group while 18 or 51.53% male learner-respondents in the experimental group. On the other hand, there were 17 or 47.22% female learner-respondents in the control group while 17 or 48.47% female learner-respondents in the experimental group.
2. Comparability between the Average Grades in Science of Control and Experimental Groups
Data revealed that the Average Grades in Science in the Control group had a mean of 82.39 while experimental group had a mean of 82.46. Based on T-test, a t-value of -0.08 at 0.05 level of significance is lower than the critical value of 1.99.
3. Summary results of t-test to determine significant difference between control and experimental groups.
The pre-test of the control and experimental groups had a computed t-value of -0.53 lower than the critical value of 1.99at .05 level of significance. There is no evidence found to reject the hypothesis of the study thus, there is no significant difference between the pre-test scores of the control and experimental groups.
While the posttest of the control and experimental group had a computed t-value of -16.41 with a critical value of 1.99, pre-test and posttest of the control group were -4.19 with a critical value of 2.03; and the pre-test and posttest of the experimental group were 23.3 with a critical value of -2.03. All values were higher than the critical value at 0.05 level of significance, hence the analysis found evidence to reject the research hypotheses of the study. Therefore, there were significant differences on the three compared variables.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the data gathered and analyzed herein, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. The profile of the learners of the experimental and control groups can be described as comparable in terms of sex and average grade in Science.
2. The post-test of the control and experimental groups were statistically significant. The participants of the experimental group exhibit remarkable evidence of enhancement as far as high scores in Science.
3. The use of differentiated instruction in teaching Science using power point presentation, hand-outs, experiments and learning style inventory test seemed to be effective in student learning process.
RECOMMENDATIONS
From the conclusions drawn in this study, it is hereby recommended that;
1. The teachers make use of differentiated instruction to assists schools in teaching responsibly by addressing student readiness, interests and preferences with the goal of raising student achievement in a classroom.
2. The use of differentiated instruction at the undergraduate level/pre-service level, student-teachers entering their field of experience who lack in basic instructional methods would be given the opportunity to experience how teachers can create structure units and craft lessons to engage academically diverse learners in a teaching-learning process.
a. Adopt use of differentiated instruction for Science instruction.
b. Use Learning Style Inventory Test at the start of the school year so that the teacher will be able to prepare different activities suited to their learning preferences.
c. Undergo sustained professional development for school wide reform. Whereas it is possible for individual teacher to devise and implement innovative approaches to teaching, if the desired output is school wide reform, there must be quality, effective and supported Professional Development.
3. Similar study is also recommended using other topics in Science which students have hard time to understand.