Engaging diverse learners in higher education via edtech-enhanced differentiated instruction

• In Event: Belonging and inclusion in higher education: Students' experiences at home and abroad (I)

Proposal

Background

Equitability in college access has been a driving force for protests in higher education (Cole, 2018). Yet, access does not guarantee success. No longer can a one-size-fits-all teaching approach work in higher education given growing student diversity. While research has shown that college students benefit from more learner-centred instruction (Chen & Chen, 2018; Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009), the pace of instructional change amongst higher education faculty has been slow (Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009; Turner et al., 2017). Differentiated instruction (DI), a learner-centred instruction that serves diverse students’ needs, has been associated with improved student outcomes (Deunk et al., 2018; Smale-Jacobse et al., 2019). However, adoption lags (Melese, 2019; Turner & Solis, 2017) as, amongst other reasons, there have been limited studies on the potential ways in which DI can be incorporated into higher education (Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009). Further, while educational technology (EdTech) has been proven effective in encouraging inclusivity (Karatza, 2019) and supporting student learning (Serrano et al., 2019), it is rarely used with DI. Thus, we explored how EdTech can be used to enhance DI to improve diverse students’ learning experiences in a Singapore university. Through a mixed-method study, we answer the research question: How do students experience various practices of EdTech-enhanced DI?

This study’s conceptual framework merges Tomlinson’s (2014) DI framework with EdTech affordances. Tomlinson (2003) defines DI as an intentional and proactive approach to planning curriculum and instruction for diverse learners with the intention of maximising learning potential and addressing needs. This educational approach requires teachers to modify the classroom elements of content, process, product, and learning environment according to students’ readiness, learning profiles, and interests (Tomlinson, 2014). The principles underpinning DI include creating a supporting learning environment, offering quality curriculum, using assessment to inform instruction, responding to student diversity, and flexibly managing the classroom (Tomlinson, 2014). These principles and classroom elements informed how EdTech were used and researched.

DI and EdTech complement each other and enhance outcomes. Combining EdTech with DI offers the advantage of efficiency in streamlining student information (Broadfoot, 2017), encourages inclusivity (Karatza, 2019), and supports multimodal learning. EdTech also helps instructors manage student data (Broadfoot, 2017; Spector et al., 2016) and helps students self-pace learning (Serrano et al., 2019). Platforms, like polling software, increases participation (Karatza, 2019; Serrano et al., 2019). Figure 1 reveals how EdTech has been synthesised with Tomlinson’s (2014) DI (redacted given incompatibility with Allacademic platform). Through studying students’ responses to EdTech-enhanced DI, we illuminate ways to make learning more equitable to enhance student success.

Methodology

This study is set in a Masters-level module at a Singapore university, with data collected over two rounds of a 13-week module. Faced with growing student diversity, the course instructor decided to adopt EdTech-enhanced DI. The first author was the course instructor, all data were collected by Research Assistants (RAs) and the instructor did not know of research participants’ identities until after grades were finalized for research ethics purpose. 32 students—7 international students, 2 males, 30 females—voluntarily participated.

We utilised a mixed-method study design that involved collecting both quantitative and qualitative data (Plano-Clark & Ivankova, 2015). The quantitative component involved pre-/post-online surveys collecting information before the module (pre-survey) and 13 weeks later (post-survey). Participants were asked to rate their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). The qualitative component involved collecting open-ended survey questions (embedded in the post-survey) and interviewing 19 (59%) participants (post-module), with a goal towards understanding changes in their responses in the pre-/post-survey. Post-module semi-structured interviews were conducted by the RAs.

With qualitative data, we used inductive analysis (Hatch, 2002), allowing for codes to emerge as opposed to pre-figuring the codes (Crabtree & Miller, 1999). The data were first sorted according to the various EdTech tools. Within each category of data, we examined the open-ended survey responses and interviews for overlapping codes. These codes were subsequently grouped together according to their similarities and reported accordingly with the original phrases to reflect participants’ voices. To enhance credibility (Shenton, 2004), codes were checked by at least two members of the research team.

Preliminary Outcomes

EdTech supporting assessment
Regarding Formative software, 55% of participants rated it “very helpful”. Participants felt that Formative aided in giving “immediate feedback” and “assess my [their] own understanding.”
Participants had overwhelmingly positive responses to the uploading of video recordings of assignment instructions online. Seventy-nine percent rated it “very helpful” “because we [they] were able to go back to the videos to review instructions we [they] may have missed out earlier”.

EdTech to differentiate classroom elements
Participants appreciated watching movies online and the subsequent asynchronous online discussion, with 97% choosing “very helpful”/“helpful”. They felt that the movie offered insights beyond their contexts and they “got to interact with peers because not all speak during lessons, so this was a good way to hear diverse views.”
Seventy-three percent found the use of Google Sheets to capture weekly in-class discussions “very helpful”/“helpful”. They appreciated being able to revisit weekly in-class discussion “even after lessons” or if they were “on leave”. This was also helpful for students who felt they were “slow learners” as they could “revise after class.”

EdTech to enhance learning environment
Seventy-nine percent of the participants reported that they found the class Padlet—where they introduced themselves online—“very helpful”/“helpful”. They thought “it was a nice way to know everyone and hear from them [because] it made getting to know them less intimidating, especially for individuals who are more introverted and/or less verbally expressive.”

Significance
Preliminary results point to great promise in using EdTech-enhanced DI to enhance inclusion in higher education, even beyond the Singapore context, given the accessibility of DI and EdTech tools. Higher education worldwide faces an increasing diversity of students in efforts to be more inclusive. Beyond access, more “protests” need to be directed to student success. We propose that EdTech-enhanced DI is one manner in which success can be enhanced.

Authors

• Tang T Heng, Nanyang Technological University-National Institute of Education

• Nannan Lu, Nanyang Technological University-National Institute of Education

• Chen DENG