Claims

Instructors most frequently report differentiated instruction strategies at the product and process level, and least often at the affect level

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Instructors in adult education blended learning most frequently reported strategies for differentiated instruction on product (n=15) and process (n=13) level, while interventions on the affect (n=8) and content (n=9) level were reported less frequently. → Boelens 2018

Evidence

Boelens 2018

Boelens, R., Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors' views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education, 120, 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Interview study of 20 instructors in two Flemish adult education centers; instructors self-reported strategies for differentiated instruction in semi-structured interviews. "interventions on the affect (n=8) and content (n=9) level were reported less frequently" than product and process strategies.

"It turns out that instructors most frequently reported strategies for differentiated instruction on product (n=15) and process (n=13) level, while interventions on the affect (n=8) and content (n=9) level were reported less frequently by the instructors."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-30
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.