See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336114099

Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils' Learning Style

Article  in  International Journal of Instruction · October 2019

DOI: 10.29333/iji.2019.12440a

CITATIONS READS

2 1,162

1 author:

Marjon Malacapay
Central Philippines State University
3 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Monitoring Sipalay City Beach-hotel Green Technology Practices and Investements View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Marjon Malacapay on 28 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Instruction October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4
e-ISSN: 1308-1470 ● www.e-iji.net p-ISSN: 1694-609X
pp. 625-638
Received: 10/02/2019
Revision: 04/07/2019
Accepted: 09/07/2019
OnlineFirst:10/09/2019

Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning Style

Marjon C. Malacapay
Central Philippines State University, Philippines, [email protected]

Differentiating of instruction is salient as learners absorb information at their own

styles. Differentiating of instruction is salient as learners absorb information at
their own styles. Thus, determining their preferred mode of instruction as to their
learning style is important. In attaining this, the researcher first determined the
respondents' (n=30) demographic profile, academic achievement, and learning
styles by distributing a survey questionnaire and further sought significant
association among them. Being an action research by design, the researcher used
both descriptive and inferential statistics such as frequency and percentage
distribution, mean and Chi-square to treat the data. Findings show that the
respondents are partly Indigenous Peoples, mostly male, whose favorite hobby is
drawing, and radio is the primary source of information. Among them, auditory
learners with very satisfactory academic achievement dominated. Furthermore,
findings revealed that there was no significant difference between the demographic
profile and learning styles. Thus, no significant relationship was also flaunted
between learning styles and academic achievement. Lastly, it shows that both
visual and auditory learners learned best when the teacher used audio-visual
presentations while kinesthetic learners learned best when applied to real objects.
This implies that learning styles are independent, not limited, nor not driven by a
demographic profile and are not influenced by academic achievement.
Keywords: basic education, differentiated instruction, teaching pedagogy, Philippines,
instruction
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Pupils of this generation do not just want to sit the entire day listening to their teachers
doing most of the talks in class. In fact, in an article written by Bryner (2007) in Live
Science, pointed out and highlighted that two out of three students get bored in their
class; 30 percent of them said it was due to lack of interaction while 70 percent was due
to non-interest-bearing report materials being taught. That is why, it is a must for
teachers to modify the content, process, or products by differentiating their instruction

Citation: Malacapay, M. C. (2019). Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning Style.

International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 625-638. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12440a
626 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

(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,
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).
In order to increase motivation and improve students’ performance as well as to meet
their preferred learning styles, it is important to update and fit teaching methods and
evaluate their efficacy (Norman, 2009). Such suggested teaching method and
instructions are the use of manipulative, visual aids, charts, audiotapes, and explicit
expectations (Lawrence-Brown, 2014). Since learners acquire and process information
at their own style such as seeing, hearing, reflection and action, thought analysis and
imagination, differentiating of instruction is important (Jacques & Salmon, 2006).
Differentiated instruction represents the new classroom teaching model as the schools’
attempt to meet the needs of a diverse student community. Among the prominent models
of differentiation is Tomlinson’s (2003) model, which proposes that teachers modify the
content, process, or products to meet the varied needs of students. Rock, Gregg, Ellis,
and Gable (2008) as cited by Landrum and McDuffie (2010) explained the theoretical
framework of differentiated instruction, based on Tomlinson’s work, through four
guiding principles and seven essential beliefs. The four guiding philosophies include (a)
a focus on vital ideas and skills in each subject area, (b) openness to individual student
differences, (c) incorporation of assessment and instruction, and (d) ongoing adjustment
of content, process, and products to meet the individual students’ levels of earlier
knowledge, critical thinking, and expression styles (Rock, et. al., 2008; p. 33).
Furthermore, he described seven essential beliefs about differentiated instruction, again
based on Tomlinson’s work, which includes (a) experiences in life and readiness to learn
to differ is much among same-aged students; (b) these difference have a much effect on
their learning; (c) students’ learning is heightened when teachers challenge them beyond

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 627

their independent level; (d) learning is more effective when related to real-life situations;
(e) student learning is enhanced by authentic learning opportunities; (f) student learning
is increased when they are respected and valued by their teachers, school, and
community; and (g) the utmost goal of education is to recognize and promote the
abilities of each student. Based on these expectations, teachers can differentiate
instruction by adjusting the content, process, and products based on students’ readiness,
interest, and learning profiles (Tomlinson, 1999; Rock et al., 2008).
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 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 one-
on-one 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). Thus, this
study aimed to bridge the gap by identifying the learners’ preferred instruction in
accordance with their learning style to provide a conducive learning experience.
Statement of the Problem
The main purpose of this study was to determine the preferred learning instruction of the
learners. Specifically, it aimed to answer these questions:
1. What is the learner’s demographic profile in terms of a.) sex; b.) ethnicity; c.)
access to learning resource; and d.) hobby?
2. What is the learner’s learning style when taken as a whole and when grouped
according to a.) visual; b.) auditory; and d.) kinesthetic?
3. What is the learner’s academic achievement when taken as a whole and when
grouped according to a.) visual; b.) auditory; and c.) kinesthetic?
4. Is there a significant difference between the learners’ demographic profile and
learning styles?
5. Is there a significant relationship between learners' learning styles and academic
achievement?

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

628 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

6. What is the learner’s preferred learning instruction when grouped according to a.)
visual; b.) auditory; and c.) kinesthetic?
Null Hypotheses
1. There is no significant difference between learners’ demographic profile and
learning styles.
2. There is no significant relationship between learners’ learning styles towards their
academic achievement.
Scope and Limitation
The scope of work presented has several limitations. First, the study focused and is
limited only in three learning styles such as visual, auditory, and kinesthetic as
enumerated by Flemming (2001) for the researcher’s convenience in preparing tasks and
materials. It was also limited and administered to grade five pupils (n=30) only. This
study is further limited to the second grading period objectives and topics of Values
Education, Math, Social Studies, English, Math, Filipino, Music, Arts, Physical
Education and Health (MAPEH), and Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE)
subjects reflected in the curriculum guide of the Department of Education. The activities
used by the researcher in four sessions per subject were selected by himself based on his
readings on the internet and were further validated (content and criterion) by three
jurors.
METHOD
This research study used an action research design since the study is quantitative.
Applying this design to a current situation helps the researcher to later develop a plan to
improve it (VanBaren, 2019). In this study, identifying an accurate and research-based
teaching instruction grounded on learners’ preferences became the researcher’s major
goal.
Participants
All the 30 grade five learners in his advisory class in one of the far-flung schools of
Kabankalan City, Negros Occidental, Philippines had been purposely selected as
respondents for his convenience. The use of the entire population as a sampling method
was a purposive choice, otherwise known as complete enumeration. Complete
enumeration enables the researcher to look at the population with a particular set of
characteristics (Hale, 2011).
Instrument
In order to generate information, the researcher used a two-part self-translated survey
questionnaire patterned from a standardized survey questionnaire in What’s Your
Learning Style (2009). The respondents’ convenience had been the primary reason for
translating the instrument’s original texts into the learners’ own mother-tongue
(Hiligaynon). Moreover, the researcher did formative assessment tools in order to assess
the learners’ comprehension on a specific lesson, a self-made tally sheet to record their

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 629

formative scores in each session, and a structured interview questionnaire to corroborate

the findings of quantitative research.
Validity and Reliability of Instrument
All tools including the research instrument, the lessons’ content used in each
instructional material, and the formative assessment tools underwent two phases of
validity tests (content and criterion). First, the researcher presented the content of the
lesson found in each instructional material and the formative assessment tools to be used
during the four sessions to three subject matter experts for content validation, thorough
review, and analysis. After consolidating the comments and revision, a content
refinement of the instrument followed. Then, the research instrument underwent
criterion validity and reliability testing. Using the criteria set forth by Carter V. Good
and Douglas E. Scates in evaluating how valid an instrument is, the three jurors rated the
questionnaire with a consolidated mean of 4.74 which was interpreted as valid. Next, the
researcher conducted a reliability testing of the questionnaire on randomly selected
grade six pupils (n=15) employing the test-retest method. Then, the data gathered was
analyzed using the Cronbach's Alpha in SPSS Statistics which caused a Cronbach's
Alpha of 0.99 (ɑ≥0.9) interpreted as excellent. Furthermore, the researcher used the
learners’ Form 137 or the Progress Report Card as the basis of pupils’ academic
achievement.
Data Gathering
The data gathering took place after a series of instrument validation. The researcher
sought written and verbal permission from the School Head and the parents, stating the
aims of the study and for parental consent. A face-to-face orientation of the researcher
among his participants, highlighting their voluntary involvement, took place.
Fortunately, everyone participated. Profiling of learners became the starting point of the
data gathering procedure. After profiling, the researcher grouped the learners according
to their learning styles and integrated differentiated instruction. The researcher utilized
the different instructional materials and teaching strategies in each session with the
students and conducted formative tests right after. After completing the four sessions,
responses and perceptions from six pupils (two from each group) were gathered using a
random, one-on-one interview through the use of structured interview questions. The
researcher asked only two questions such as “Ano sa mga hilikuton ang imo pinaka na
luyagan? [What activities did you like the most from all the activities that we had made?
kag ngaa [Why]?” in order to justify the numerical results. This became the basis for
making a research conclusion about the learners’ preferred instruction. The data
gathering took almost two months (middle of September to the first week of November)
because of the time needed in preparing such instructional materials. After gathering,
consolidating, and encoding the results, it underwent data analysis using the SPSS
application.
Data Treatment
The researcher used both descriptive and inferential statistics for data treatment such as
frequency counts to find the respondents’ profile and learning style, mean for academic

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

630 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

achievement, percentages for the effectiveness of each instruction, and Pearson-r with a
.05 threshold to decide the relationship among variables.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Presented herewith are the results of data treatment and its corresponding analysis.
Table 1
The Demographic Profile Distribution of Grade 5 Pupils
Demographic Profile Frequency Percent
Sex
Male 20 67
Female 10 33
Total 30 100
Ethnicity
Indigenous Peoples (IP’s) 12 40
Non-IP’s 18 60
Total 30 100
Access to Learning
Books 11 37
Cellphone 6 20
Television 1 3
Radio 12 40
Abacus/Counters 0 0
VCD/DVD 0 0
Total 30 100
Hobby
Reading 1 3
Singing 5 17
Drawing 13 43
Talking 8 27
Listening to Music 2 7
Playing Instrument 0 0
Playing with Friends 1 3
Doing House Chores 0 0
Hiking 0 0
Total 30 100
The demographic profile distribution in table 1 shows that among 30 respondents, male
learners dominated at 67 percent (20), a multi-cultural class having 60 percent (18) non-
Indigenous Peoples, 40 percent (12) have radios at home which serves as their access to
learn, and 43 percent (13) of them loves to draw.

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 631

Table 2
Frequency Distribution Table of the Learners’ Learning Style
Learning Styles Frequency Percent
Visual 9 30
Auditory 14 47
Kinesthetics 7 23
Total 30 100

The frequency of the learner’s learning style distribution in Table 2 reveals that out of
30 respondents, auditory learners dominated with 47 percent (14) followed by visual and
kinesthetic. It implies that the majority of the learners, when classified in to three
groups, learn best through listening.
Table 3
The Learners’ Academic Achievement
Grades Visual Auditory Kinesthetics Interpretation
F % F % F %
90-100 0 0 1 7 1 13 Outstanding
85-89 2 25 3 21 0 0 Very Satisfactory
80-84 1 13 8 57 5 63 Satisfactory
Fairly
75-79 5 63 2 14 2 25
Satisfactory
Did Not Meet
Below 75 0 0 0 0 0 0
Expectation
Total 8 100 14 100 8 100
Mean and 2.67 3.21 3.00
Interpretation FS VS S
Legend: V- Visual A- Auditory K- Kinesthetics FS- Fairly Satisfactory S- Satisfactory
The learners’ academic achievement distribution in Table 3 exhibits the mode and
mean scores of grades five pupils’ academic achievement. When respondents are
grouped according to learning styles, visual learners performed fairly satisfactorily
(2.67) because 63 percent (5) has grades between 75-79. On the other hand, auditory
learners performed very satisfactorily (3.21) because 57 percent (8) has 80-84 grades,
and kinesthetic learners at 63 percent (5) performed satisfactorily (3.00) with grades
between 80-84. The result implies that kinesthetics learners dominated this group of
pupils whose academic achievement was very satisfactory and the rest was satisfactory
and fairly satisfactory

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

632 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

Table 4
The Difference between Learners’ Demographic Profile and Learning Styles
Learning Style vs Statistical Chi-square Value P-value Decision Conclusion
Sex 2.196a 0.333 Fail to Reject Ho Not Significant
Ethnicity 1.131a 0.568 Fail to Reject Ho Not Significant
Chi-square
Hobby 10.389a 0.407 Fail to Reject Ho Not Significant
Access to Learning 9.643a 0.141 Fail to Reject Ho Not Significant
*.05 level of Significance
Table 4 above reveals the difference between the learners' demographic profile and
learning style at .05 level of significance. Using Chi-square, research showed that the
demographic profile of learners such as sex (Chi-square= 2.196a; p-value= 0.333),
ethnicity (Chi-square= 1,131a; p-value= 0.568), hobby (Chi-square= 10.389a; p-value=
0.407), and access to learning (Chi-square= 9.643a; p-value= 0.141), has no significant
difference in learning style. The result of the study, therefore, failed to reject the
hypothesis that learners’ demographic profile such as sex, ethnicity, access to learning,
and hobby has no significant difference in learning styles.
The result on table 4 further implies that each one’s learning style do es not rely either
on our sex, ethnicity, access to learning, hobby, and therefore independent and is not
influenced by demographic profile. This opposes the findings of Sarabi-Asiaba, et. al.
(2014) that male students preferred to use the kinesthetic learning style more than
females, while, female students preferred the aural learning style. The non-significant
result of the study may be due to individual difference. Individual learning styles depend
on cognitive, emotional, and environmental factors, as well as one’s prior experience
(Teach.com, 2008).
Table 5
The Relationship between Learners’ Learning Styles and Academic Achievement
Variable Corr. Coef. p-value Decision Interpretation
Learning Style and Grades 1.089 .403 Accept Ho Not Significant
*.05 level of Significance
Table 5 reveals that learners’ learning style and academic achievement has no
significant relationship (Corr. Coef. = .403, p-value= .403) at .05 level of significance
after administering the Pearson-r correlations test. The result thereby failed to reject the
hypothesis that learning styles and grades/academic achievement has no significant
relationship. The result implies that academic achievement is not influenced nor driven
by any specific learning style.
The findings obtained agreed with the findings of the study made by Awang, Abd,
Samad, Faiz, Roddin, and Kankia (2017) that the learning style and academic
achievement of students in Malaysian Polytechnic have no significant difference
between learning style and academic achievement of students and are quite similar to
their individual learning styles. These facts reveal that each learning style has its own
strengths and weaknesses. However, the correlational study of Nzeseia (2015) among
secondary school students in Kenya argues the result of the study. In his study, he

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 633

found a strong positive and statistically significant relationship between learning styles
and academic achievement for the trimodal learners, and among male and female
students.
Table 6
Learners Preferred Learning Instruction
Learning Styles with Activities Applied Percent of Effectiveness
Visual Learners
Audio-Visual Presentation 67
Pictures on Meta-cards 53
Verbal Teaching only 50
Graphic Organizers 30
Plain Text Reading Materials 26
Realia/Real Objects 25
Auditory Learners
Audio-Visual Presentation 82
Verbal Discussion/Teaching 81
Plain Text Reading Materials 76
Mnemonics 75
Picture analysis 67
Realia 62
Word Drills 60
Chorale Reading 50
Dictation 45
Kinesthetic Learners
Real Object/Realia 72
Verbal-finger Memorization 67
Simulation/ Drama 62
Chorale Reading 50
Demonstration by the teacher 50
Student-teacher interaction 47
Audio-visual presentation 43
Jotting down of notes 43
Games/Play 19
No class interaction 14
Table 6 shows the effectiveness of each activity/instruction applied by the teacher in
four sessions to 30 pupils. The mean percentage scores were obtained as a result
of the formative test that revealed visual learners learn best when the teacher
used audio-visual presentation (67%). As auditory learners, Audio-visual
presentation (82%) was their preferred learning instruction. Using real
objects/tactile materials either by the teacher or them (72%) after
instruction/discussion is the preferred learning instruction of kinesthetic learners.

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

634 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

The above result clearly implies that even learners in the mountainous community prefer
an ICT (Information and Communication Technology) driven teaching
instruction than that of the traditional ones. The numerical data obtained was
further supported by the learners’ responses during the interview . It can be
elucidated that the learners in class are alive and are enjoying based on their
responses.
Learners A and B both said that AVP enables them to clearly see the objects moving
than just pictures that are flat.
“Ganahan ko sir nga ga gamit ug bidyo kay naga giho gyud.“ [Sir, I like it when
you use video clip because it is moving.] -Learner A
“Klaro ka-ayo ang video sang sa picture.” [The video is much clearer than that
of the pictures.] -Learner B
Furthermore, learner C said that learning through AVP is not boring.
“Wala ko gapanguy-ab kay dili man ku tuyohon kay tagalog pod.” [I do not
yawn because it is not sleepy and because it is in Filipino language as well.]
While learner F said that “Lami kun ma kaptan gyud nimo kay ma tuyok mo gid, ug ma
lingaw ka ba.” [It is nice if it can be held by hand because I can manipulate it and its
fun.]
Summary of Findings
In summary, the researcher found out that of the total population of grade five learners,
of which male pupils dominated the population are multi-cultural, radio listeners, and
passionate to draw. Moreover, it also shows that auditory learners having very
satisfactory academic achievement dominated the classroom. Also, it reveals that these
set of learners have their preferred learning styles, more specifically visual and auditory
learners preferred learning with the aid of Audio-Visual Presentation, while kinesthetic
learners learn best with the aid of real objects. Furthermore, the study shows no
significant difference between demographic profile and learning style, and no significant
relationship between learning style and academic achievement of the learners. It implies
that learning styles are not dependent, not confined, and not influenced by a single
demographic profile and academic achievement. Despite that learners were in a far-
flung school, having a limited exposure to technology, they already recognized its value
in providing a meaningful learning experience.
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions were drawn out by the researcher from the findings of the
data gathered. First, it can be concluded that learning styles are independent per se. It is
not limited, influenced, or driven by any demographic profile understudy. Moreover, the
academic achievement of the pupils was not influenced by nor influences any of the
learning styles under study. Gaining knowledge is therefore not limited in a single
instruction only. Thus, the researcher also concluded that among all the applied

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 635

instruction to the three different types of learners, the use of both Audio-visual
Presentation materials and real objects prevailed as the most preferred one. Despite they
were in a remote area, where exposure to technology is rare, it is undeniable that the
traditional ways of teaching are no longer desirable.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Here are the recommendations and suggestions made by the researcher based on the
facts and findings.
Teachers have to consider that learning acquisition varies. So, giving instructions,
activities, and learning materials to learners must be differentiated. This will allow the
visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners to explore the contents of the lessons from
different methods and tasks offered. Such instructional materials should not only be on
the content but also in the process, and output/product of the lessons. Teachers, as well,
are suggested to update themselves about the proper use and integration of Audio-Visual
Presentation, accompanied by a real/replica of objects or any tactile things during
classroom teaching. The researcher also recommends the Department of Education to
invest and produce more content-based educational videos (preferably in the Filipino
language) and be available online.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper was presented at the 19th CEBU- International Conference on Economics,
Education, Humanities and Social Sciences (CEEHSS-19) on January 29-30, 2019 in
Cebu City, Philippines. It was funded by the Department of Education (DepEd) under
the Basic Education Research Fund (BERF). First, the author acknowledges Father
Almighty as the source of his wisdom. He also acknowledges Central Philippines State
University (CPSU) through its President, Dr. Aladino C. Moraca, Dr. Fernando D.
Abello, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Dr. Joel A. Perez, VP for Research and
Extension, Dr. Mae Flor G. Posadas, Director for Research and Development Services,
and Engr. Marc Alexei Caesar B. Badajos, campus administrator of CPSU Sipalay for
funding the presentation. To the Schools Division Office of Kabankalan City through
the Schools Division Superintendent Ma. Lorlinie M. Ortillo, CESO VI, and the
Division Research Committee Dr. Saturnino Pabalinas, Jr., secretariat, and SEPS for
Research and Planning Rene S. Erillo for their guidance and help. Lastly, an
acknowledgment to his parents Jocelyn and Maximiano, and brother Cedric James for
the inspiration.
REFERENCES
Aranda, M. R., & Zamora, J. (2016). Using differentiated instruction in improving the
academic performance of students in the Filipino language. Retrieved from
https://www.national-u.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/JSTAR-4_Aranda.pdf
Awang, H., Abd Samad, N., Faiz, N., Roddin, R. D., & Kankia, J. (2017). Relationship
between the learning styles preferences and academic achievement. IOP Conference

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

636 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 226, 012193. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-

899X/226/1/012193.
Bryner, J. (2007). Most students bored at school. Retrieved from
https://www.livescience.com/1308-students-bored-school.html
Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated
instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education
of the Gifted, 37(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529042
Ferrier, M. A. (2007). The effects of differentiated instruction on academic achievement
in a second-grade science classroom.
Flemming, N. (2001). Visual, auditory and kinesthetic (VAK) learning style model.
Retrieved from https://martimurphy.com/pdf/VAK_Learning_Style_Model.pdf.
García, P., Amandi, A., Schiaffino, S., Campo, M. (2007). Evaluating Bayesian
networks’ precision for detecting students’ learning styles. Comput Educ., 49(3), 794-
808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.017.
Hale, J. (2011). The 3 basic types of descriptive research methods. Psych Central.
Retrieved from https://psychcentral.com/blog/the-3-basic-types-of-descriptive-research-
methods/
Hylton, K. (2017). Are learning styles important? Career & Education. Retrieved April
22, 2019, from http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/career-education/are-learning-styles-
important-_117401?profile=1270
Jaques, D., & Salmon, G. (2006). Learning in groups: A handbook for face-to-face and
online environments. Routledge
Kauffman, J. M., Mock, D. R., Tankersley, M., & Landrum, T. J. (2008). Effective
service delivery models. In R. J. Morris, & N. Mather (Eds.), Evidence-based
interventions for students with learning and behavioral challenges (pp. 359–378).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Landrum, T., & McDuffie, K. (2010) Learning Styles in the Age of Differentiated
Instruction, Exceptionality, 18:1, 6-17, DOI: 10.1080/09362830903462441
Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for
standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education
32(3), 34.
Leonardo, R., Nivera, G., & Reyes, A. (2015). Effects of differentiated learning on
college students’ achievement in and attitude towards trigonometry.
McQuarrie, L., McRae, P., & Stack-Cutler, H. (2008). Differentiated instruction
provincial research review. Edmonton: Alberta Initiative for School Improvement.

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

Malacapay 637

Norman, G. (2009). When will learning style go out of style? Adv Health Sci Educ
Theory Pract., 14(1),1-4.
Nzeseia, M.M. (2015). correlation study between learning styles and academic
achievement among secondary school students in Kenya. Retrieved from
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/93142/Mutua_A+correlation+stud
y+between+learning+styles+and+academic+achievement+among+secondary+school.pd
f?sequence=1
Othman, N., & Amiruddin, M. H. (2010). Different perspectives of learning styles from
VARK Model. Procedia Soc Behav Sci;7:652–60. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.088.
Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACG: A framework for
differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31–47.
Sarabi-Asiabar, A., Jafari, M., Sadeghifar, J., Tofighi, S., Zaboli, R., Peyman, H., …
Shams, L. (2014). The relationship between learning style preferences and gender,
educational major and status in first year medical students: a survey study from iran.
Iranian Red Crescent medical journal, 17(1), e18250. doi:10.5812/ircmj.18250
Shenoy, N., & Shenoy, K A. (2013). The perceptual preferences in learning among
dental students in clinical subjects; 7(8):1683-5.
Singh, L. (2015). LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AMONG SECONDARY
SCHOOL STUDENTS. 10.13140/RG.2.2.36377.72803.
Teach.com (2018). Learning Styles. All Students Are Created Equally (and Differently.)
Retrieved April 21, 2019, from https://teach.com/what/teachers-know/learning-styles/
The Peak Performance Center (n.d.). Types of Learning Models. Retrieved April 24,
2019, from thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-
learning/learning/preferences/learning-styles//types-learning-style-models/
Tieso, C. (2005). The effects of grouping practices and curricular adjustments on
achievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29(1), 60–89.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Moon, T. (2014). Assessment in the Differentiated Classroom.
Classroom Management and Assessment, 1–5.
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 literature. Journal of the Education of the Gifted, 27, 119–145.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all
learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

 638 Differentiated Instruction in Relation to Pupils’ Learning …

VanBaren, J. (2019). What are the Types of Action Research Design? Retrieved April
22, 2019, from https://bizfluent.com/list-7608678-types-action-research-design.html
What’s Your Learning Style (2009). Retrieved december 25, 2018, from
http://people.usd.edu/~bwjames/tut/learning-style/

International Journal of Instruction, October 2019 ● Vol.12, No.4

View publication stats