Unravelling the dichotomy of differentiated instruction in Bahrain: inclusionary or exclusionary practice?

Abstract

For decades, differentiated instruction (DI) has been utilized as a generalist teaching approach and an inclusive practice in order to enhance the participation of all learners in the mainstream classroom, including learners with special educational needs. The extensive use of differentiation in mainstream classrooms as the gateway to inclusive education denotes the academic and social participation of all learners in a diverse environment. However, the lack of consensus on the specific implementation of DI has the potential for exclusionary tendencies based on nuances in its implementation and approach. While several educational systems prescribe differentiation in their policies as the main way of inclusive practice, it comes with minimal guidance or training on how it should actually be implemented. In the case of Bahrain, DI is infused through pre-service and in-service education programs, as well as advised and expected by the main quality assurance agency in the kingdom. This article discussed the dichotomy of DI and how the undermining dualism to its execution can have a counterproductive impact on students’ academic and social inclusion. The research questions pertaining to this study are therefore: how is DI conceptualized and implemented in primary classrooms in Bahrain? How does the degree to which this was observed contribute or hinder the academic and social inclusion of diverse learners? Data were collected from four participating teachers through a series of classroom observations and follow-up interviews. The article examined the qualitative data in primary level classrooms through a multiple case study design which elicited six main themes relating to the practice of DI: diverse teaching in response to classroom heterogeneity, mixed ability grouping arrangements, collaborative work, the peer pairing strategy, learning through play, and tiered assignments. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the data based on a pre-conceived construction of the main factors of DI including differentiating content, process, and product; in response to students’ readiness, learning profile, and interests. The article proposed an approach to DI that is more conducive for both the academic and social inclusion of all learners. These practices are assigned as inclusionary or exclusionary practices based on: overt versus covert differentiation; individual versus collaborative work; teacher’s choice of differentiated task versus student’s choice of task; and teacher’s conceptualization of differentiation.