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

net/publication/324843878

THE THEORY OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION AND ITS APPLICABILITY:

AN E-LEARNING PERSPECTIVE

Article · April 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 8,086

2 authors:

Fareeha Rasheed Abdul Wahid

Maulana Azad National Urdu University Maulana Azad National Urdu University
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   42 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

ADAPTIVE SEQUENCE GENERATION FOR LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT View project

Software Effort Estimation for Web Applications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fareeha Rasheed on 30 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

VSRD International Journal of Technical & Non-Technical Research, Vol. IX Issue IV April 2018 / 193
e-ISSN: 0976-7967, p-ISSN: 2319-2216 © VSRD International Journals: www.vsrdjournals.com, UGC Approved Serial No. 48578

RESEARCH PAPER

THE THEORY OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION AND ITS

APPLICABILITY: AN E-LEARNING PERSPECTIVE
1Fareeha
Rasheed* and 2Abdul Wahid
1Research
Scholar, 2Dean of Academics & Professor,
1,2Department of Computer Science & Information Technology,

Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

*Corresponding Author’s Email Id: fareeha_zarish22@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
Educational psychologists, instructional designers, and teachers in various setups both in the literature and in surveys have
unanimously agreed that every student learns in a different way and thus gave rise to the theory of differentiated instruction which says
that the teacher in order to make the learning process beneficial for the learner should take into account the individual differences of
the learner to modify the type of content delivered, the assessments being conducted, sequence of delivery of content and/or various
other learner characteristics. In this paper we have attempted to simplify the theory of differentiated instruction, giving inputs as to
how it can be implemented both in a pure online and a blended learning mode. The problems associated with the design, development
and delivery of systems that work on this theory will also be identified and put forward and some theoretical solutions will be put
forward which can be used by course designers.

Keywords: Educational Psychology, Individual Differences, Instructional Design.

1. INTRODUCTION explicated upon by John Dewey, an American

Every student differs in his approach towards studies,
even inside a single classroom, the thought process, the
perception towards the content being delivered, the type
of content being delivered, emotional stability, the
sequence of instruction being delivered each and every
thing related to the instruction. Not each student learns
from the same resource, the same process and same
sequence, each of us is different in nature; time and again
it has been proved that one size doesn’t fit all, neither
clothes, nor shoes and so does the differences apply to
instruction as well. The contents in the textbook and the
learning objectives are standardized for single class
students, but it depends on the teacher to modify the
presentation of content, the sequence in which they are
delivered, the type of assessments for each learner or a
group of learners. The theory of differentiated instruction
is one of the sensational theories in education which
changed the way a teacher teaches according to the needs
of the learner.
John Amos Comenius, in 1642, was the first teacher to
recognize that the content being delivered to the student
was too boring and tedious and it was in the true narrative
sense and not beneficial to the learner, he pointed out that
things should be presented in less general manner and
more special manner [1]. These notions were further
philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer, who
felt that ―education, must begin with a psychological
insight into the child's capacities, interests, and habits [2].
Lev Vygotsky, Russian psychologist, who theorized that
it’s important to assess the exact level of capabilities of
the child so that the child can be provided by input which
is just above his capabilities which is beneficial to him,
[3]. Later on, Jean Piaget proposed the theory of
cognitive development [4], then American psychologist
Howard Gardner theorized the now known theory of
multiple intelligences [5], to later Robert Stenberg who
introduced thinking styles in which students differ which
provided a way to assist teachers to understand their
students [6], and so on.
There are two different types of differentiation- internal
and external differentiation, external differentiation, is
about putting different learners in different classrooms,
learners are grouped together according to their capability
levels, special education schools and other universities.
Internal differentiation takes place inside the classroom,
modifying the content, the method of delivery and other
modifications [7].
Dr. Carol Ann Tomlinson illustrates on the need for
differentiation in our day in these words:
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
In order to teach culturally and academically diverse
populations effectively, schools will have to move from
standardized instruction to personalized instruction. Our
best knowledge of effective teaching and learning
suggests clearly that teacher responsiveness to race,
gender, culture, readiness, experience, interest, and
learning preferences results in increased student
motivation and achievement. … An increasingly complex
society in which nearly every career and profession
Accordingly, the diagram can be described in simple
terms for a layman to understand, what differentiation is?
Differentiation is the teachers’ responses to the learners’
needs which may differ from learner to learner.
Differentiation is guided by some principles out of which
three which form its core according to the literature we
have studied are quality curriculum, continual assessment
and flexible grouping. The curriculum for a particular
course plays a very important role, if the curriculum is
inconsistent, incomplete and unruly; there are some
problems associated with differentiation in such a
curriculum. For example, if the curriculum is inconsistent
and changes very frequently, the reusability of resources
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 194
requires problem solving and flexible thinking means that
students must learn to be critical thinkers, problem
solvers, and producers of knowledge (rather than just
consumers of knowledge)
Tomlinson not only tells us why differentiated instruction
is beneficial, but also, she goes all the way to define as to
how differentiation is done, what are the methods and
other techniques and are described below, the image
below is taken from Tomlinson’s article [8]
is reduced and differentiation becomes a problem for the
teacher. If it is incomplete then activities cannot be
planned properly and so on. Continual assessment is a
very important principle which guides differentiation,
learner needs changes with time and it’s very important
for the teacher to assess the need of the learner as and
when the change takes place. For example, after a class or
two the student might be in a better state than he was at
the beginning of the class, or it may have turned worst.
Flexible grouping too is an important principle. As the
emphasis on social learning is increasing it is important
for the teacher to help the learner to interact within a
group of learners who have similar interests, and similar
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
needs so that activities become fun and learning is more
powerful.
The diagram also tells us as to how many levels the
differentiation can happen, the differentiation can happen
in any or all of the 5 levels together. Content, process,
product, affect and learning environment. The simplest
differentiation is of the content, that different content is
provided to different learners, how the content can be
modified in the E-learning scenario will be embarked
upon in the section III, the process whether students are
assessed first, then learning stats or lessons are delivered
first and assessment comes later on, product- whether the
product or outcomes of learning are different for learning
and lastly, the learning environment, some learners learn
better in open schools, some get distracted and so on.
Then there is on what grounds is the differentiation in
learners done: the learner can be differentiated according
to his readiness, interest and learning profile. The
readiness in the learner is how ready is he to learn the
concept, will he/she be able to grasp the subject,
depending upon the content and other characteristics, the
interest of the learner is a very important basis, if the
learner is not interested to take in the concept he should
be prepared to understand the need of the concept and the
applicability of it. The learning profile the most versatile
term for a variety of other learner characteristics used to
differentiate is often the most misunderstood one. It
rather being a single characteristic, is a group of the
individual traits of the learner that make the learning
profile, such as aptitude, learning style, thinking style,
cognitive style and so on.
According to survey conducted by us for a larger module
of our study, learning style, emotional state of the learner,
and his current knowledge affect the learning process.
The other characteristics were financial status of the
learner, cultural background, motivation by the teacher,
and content modification. Many teachers agreed that the
three important characteristics were learning style,
emotional state and the current knowledge level of the
learner. Although there were also few takers for cultural
background, but due to difficulty in its implementation in
the E-learning scenario, it was overlooked.
In Section II we try to analyze the different theories that
support differentiated instruction, section III reviews the
various systems in literature and current scenario that are
designed using this methodology, section IV elucidates
the problems associated with these systems and future
work that can be conducted to make such systems better.
2. THEORIES THAT SUPPORT
DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION
In the introduction, we have seen that the learner is
differentiated on three different grounds readiness,
interest and learning profile. In this section let us see
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 195
what literature supports these three characteristics.
Readiness is the state of the learner wherein he/ she is
fully prepared for something, in the current scenario it is
learning or studying a new concept. Interest, this
characteristic of the learner allows differentiation at the
external level to a greater extent, because the student is
interested or his parents see his interest in the subject they
get him enrolled in the course. But the teacher is still the
responsible one to observe the learner whether he is
interested to study the subject or not. Learning profile of
the learner is usually either one or many of the following:
learning style, thinking style, affective state, cultural
differences, current knowledge about the subject, and
aptitude.
Readiness for learning, exercise, and effect were the three
principles that formed the laws learning which was
introduced by Edward Thorndike in [9]. The readiness of
learning is discussed here, since it forms an integral part
of the differentiated instruction. According to Alwin R.
Schindler [10], readiness for learning either demands
some background related to the concepts that are being
introduced and also a sense of greater interest for the
concept as a whole. Readiness is also referred to as
preparedness by Martin E. P. Seligman in [11].
Principle of Exercise in learning works on the simple
notion that things that are practiced and repeated often are
the ones that are remembered and retained for a longer
period of time than things which are done only once. The
concept of this law comes from the biological proof that
connections between the neurons get stronger if the same
task is repeated again and again.
The principle of effect is established on the emotional
reaction of the student. Motivation is the direct outcome
of effect. The principle of effect is that learning is
strengthened when followed by a satisfied feeling, and
that learning is weakened when followed with
displeasure.
Interest, the second criteria for differentiation in students
is usually the criteria which is used for external
differentiation under which they are externally streamed
into groups so that students taking up the same course are
grouped together. Learning profile is a complex attribute
of the learner that is taken as whole or singular other
characteristics which are listed earlier in this section.
In the following paragraphs some of the literature related
to cognitive style, learning style, emotions, cultural
differences, current knowledge level, aptitude and
Intelligent Quotient are discussed and their importance in
the learner process according to different educationists is
also analyzed.
Allport [13], defined cognitive style as the individual’s
typical or habitual mode of problem solving, thinking,
perceiving and remembering, while learning style is the
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 196

application of cognitive style in a learning situation [14]
Cognitive styles are the ones in which the individuals
approach cognitive tasks, and learning styles are the ones
in which the individuals approach the learning tasks
[15]learning styles refers to the notion that individuals
differ in regard to what mode of instruction or study is
most effective for them[12]
There are many different theories which are classified as
learning style theories and cognitive style theories, one
literature review identified 71 different models [16] some
of them are summarized with their dimensions in the
table below.

Table 1: Learning Style

Learning
Based On Dimensions
Style
Dunn and
VAKT based Environmental, Emotional, Sociological, Physiological, Psychological
Dunn
Gregorc VAKT based Perceptual Quality, Ordering Ability
Cognitive
Riding
structure
Cognitive Visual-spatial, Verbal-linguistic, mathematical-logical, bodily-kinesthetic, musical,
Gardner
structure interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic
Cognitive
Guilford Operations, Contents, Product
structure
Stable
Apter Meta-motivational, motivational, emotional
personality
Stable
Jackson Auditory, Kinesthetic, visual
personality
Stable
Myers-Briggs Attitudes, functions, lifestyle preferences
personality
Allinson& Flexible
Intuition, approach to studying
Hayes personality
Flexible
Kolb Feeling, thinking, doing, visualizing
personality
Felder Flexible
Information processing, input, understanding, perception
Silverman personality

theories and their dimensions

Another important characteristic of the learning that is an
integral part of the learning profile is the emotion of the
learner. Many educationists and philosophers have
proved using experiments the influence of emotion on
cognitive processes, learning processes, and memory
storage and retrieval in learners. The importance of
relationship of learning and emotion is not new and was
already pointed out by the early Greek philosophers like
Aristotle, by psychologists like Wilhelm Wundt and by
educators like Maria Montessori [17]. Emotion is any
conscious experience [18] [19] [20] characterized by
intense mental activity and a certain degree of pleasure or
displeasure. [21] [22].
Mood-congruence hypothesis [23], proposes that mood
congruence eases cognitive tasks, such as positive
feedback after successful completion can be easily
recalled in positive mood whereas, a negative feedback
will be recalled in only negative mood. Positive emotions
ease the work on tasks which demand creativity and
fantasy from the learners [24] [25]. This was also found
in creativity research with children [26].
The few studies linking positive emotions to achievement
show that joy, hope, and pride positively correlate with
students’ academic self-efficacy, academic interest and
effort, and overall achievement [27]. Students’ pride in
their achievement in particular academic subjects can
predict performance in those subjects [28] Positive
emotions are hypothesized to facilitate approach-related
activities, and these activities are likely to provide
academic benefits, particularly as the student moves
toward a desired goal [29]. Positive emotions enhance
academic competence because they encourage exploring,
integrating diverse materials, and broadening potential
methods of solving problem. [26]
Current knowledge level, is another important variable in
the learning profile of the learner, there are certain studies
wherein this variable is explored, some of them can be
found in [30] [31] [32]. The authors have conducted pilot
studies that concluded that for improved learning there is
a need for prior knowledge in the subject that leads to
creation of interest and readiness in the pupil and also the
motivation to seek new knowledge in the domain takes
place. Prior knowledge assessment is also beneficial for
the teacher in order to differentiate the lessons for the
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
learners so that the learners who are already equipped
with the concepts do not feel bored in the class and the
students who do not know any basic about it are left
behind.
3. ONLINE DIFFERENTIATED
INSTRUCTION:
E-learning is online learning, converting the traditional
offline scenario to online, giving a learner the flexibility
of time, place, and content. Even in the absence of a
physical teacher there is a possibility of faster instruction
speeds and on the spur assessment results and feedback.
With advancements in this domain, interesting
instructional designs and pedagogies are being
incorporated to make the online learning environments as
real as possible. Differentiated instruction in the offline
scenario can be implemented online, only difference is
the teacher’s working with the paper is missing and
various tools can be downloaded and differentiated
content can be created easily.
In E-learning differentiated instruction has the same
meaning as the traditional approach, but there is
availability of tools which can help to differentiate by
generating different content formats, provide
interactivity, and methods to collect data and reproduce
customized content according to the needs of the learner.
In this section we try to elucidate the developments in E-
learning that have taken place due to incorporation of
differentiated instruction in online learning.
One interesting aspect of differentiated e-learning or e-
diff is the quite but progressive introduction of
customization and personalization into E-learning
systems [34] [35] In e-learning products, a variety of
assessment approaches are being used for such diverse
purposes as adaptive delivery of content, individualizing
learning materials, dynamic feedback, cognitive
diagnosis, score reporting and course placement [36].
If the assessment approaches are being made to give
instruction during the process of learning, then
differentiating the challenge level, types of formats,
representations and feedback [37] [38] might make a
difference in how or how much the child or adult learns.
Feed forward to teachers by systems that collect and
report information can also influence teacher expectations
of students. When integrated, the potential of
differentiation to affect student learning can be great [39].
In the e-learning context, it also becomes faster and easier
to provide some differentiation, so it is important that
differentiation is good, just as is important in the
classroom-based context.
One way that differentiation in e-learning products often
differs from classroom is in intent. in classroom, the
differentiation of content can mean different knowledge,
understanding and skills, some researchers argue that it
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 197
should not be different learning outcomes but rather
differentiation in ways to access those learning outcomes
[39]. The argument often is that the strongest classroom-
based differentiation methods ensure that all students
work with the necessary understanding for a concept, thus
ensuring stability of learning goals. However, e- learning
products are often designed to stretch the individual
student’s opportunity to learn, to include going beyond
learning objectives and to attain higher goals than the
outcomes defined.
Computers are just dumb machines, they only work when
programmed properly, and they can never replace a
human teacher who can modify the tone, the content in a
matter of seconds immediately as the needs of the learner
and also the learner characteristics are not known in
advance, the most important challenge is how to represent
the learner to a computer and also how to properly
differentiate the type of content to make it useful for the
learner.
A framework given in [40] seems a simple approach as to
how we can differentiate in the E-learning scenario, it has
5 approaches, either one or more than one can be used in
combination to provide differentiation.
 “Diffuse” approach to differentiation, in which
students receive the same content but have multiple
opportunities for learning and can make sense of the
content throughout the course
 Self-directed approach, student is asked for feedback
and the differentiation is provided accordingly
 Naïve differentiation, in which the computer
determines the path of differentiation, not the user,
but that no real plan or overall strategy is in place.
 Boolean differentiation, in which the computers use
types of Boolean logic, such as various types of rule-
based frameworks or decision trees, to find how to
adjust content for different students.
 Model-based differentiation, in which expert opinion
is combined with a variety of data mining techniques
to generate rules for how content might be
appropriately differentiated.
According to our understanding, the diffusion approach
does not try to match to the learner’s needs but it can
cater to larger groups of students with diverse needs it’s
just like a portal trying to put together different media
formats where student can access what he wants. The
self-regulated approach is dependent on the student where
he selects and tries to access the system, the system
shows them menus, and options. Naïve differentiation is
just that a computer has to respond when the student takes
an action. Boolean approaches work with different logical
operators to generate some paths or help in problem
solving and differentiate on the basis of some rules. The
last approach uses data mining techniques like gaussian
learning, clustering, classification and other methods to
predict and create a model of the student and then provide
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
differentiated contents.
Differentiated instruction in the online scenario has given
rise to a new category of systems which are in the e-
learning domain called as AIWBES- Adaptive and
Intelligent Web-based Educational Systems [40].
Adaptive and intelligent Web-based educational systems
(AIWBES) provide an alternative to the traditional “just-
put-it-on-the-Web” approach in the development of Web-
based educational courseware. [40]. The first adaptive
and intelligent web-based educational systems were
Fig. 2: AIWBES technologies [41]
An intelligent tutoring system (ITS) is a computer system
that aims to provide immediate and customized
instruction or feedback to learners, [42], The goal of
the curriculum sequencing technology (also referred to as
instructional planning technology) is to provide the
student with the most suitable individually planned
sequence of knowledge units to learn and sequence of
learning tasks (examples, questions, problems, etc.) to
work with. In other words, it helps the student to find an
"optimal path" through the learning material, [41].
Intelligent solution analyzer, a solution analyzer has to
decide whether the solution is correct or not, find out
what exactly is wrong or incomplete, and possibly
identify which missing or incorrect knowledge may be
responsible for the error (the last functionality is referred
as knowledge diagnosis) [41].
Adaptive hypermedia systems build a model of the goals,
Table 2: Intelligent Tutoring Systems
NAME DOMAIN
BIP system [43] BASIC prog.language
CALAT [44] Communication Technology
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 198
developed long before the theory of differentiated
instruction was formalized. These systems were
developed in the year 1995, 1996 [41]. When the
statement adaptive-intelligent systems are seen, the
expectations are using artificial intelligence techniques
and adapt the system. But earlier systems just
concentrated on simple rules which cannot be called as
intelligent, in [41], the authors have tried to review the
various technologies present in AIWBES and have
summarized them to give the below structure.
preferences and knowledge of each individual user, and
use this model throughout the interaction with the user, in
order to adapt to the needs of that user [43]. Adaptive
Hypermedia systems are the most commonly used
adaptive systems, they are easy to build and usually work
with hiding of links, annotation, sorting links and
providing adaptive navigation to the learners as they
move around in the system.
However, research needs to be conducted to gather the
best qualities of both the types of systems and create
hybrid systems which have the qualities of both
intelligent tutoring and adaptive hypermedia. And then
they can be tested, and, generalized for large audiences
over greater variety of domains. Table below try to
summarize a few systems from the literature, they are
grouped by their type. The technique used, and their
domain is also defined
NAME DOMAIN
LISP-Tutor [51] LISP Programming language
ELM-ART II [52] LISP Programming language
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 199

VC Prolog Tutor [45] Prolog programming language PAT online system [53] Practical algebra Tutor
ELM-ART-II [46] LISP programming language D3-WWW-Trainer [54] Disease Diagnosis
KBSHyperbook [47] Visual Book AlgeBrain [55] Equations
Medtec [48] Basic anatomy ADIS [56] Data Structures
MANIC [49] Different courses ILESA [57] Simplex Algorithm
DCG [50] Authoring system TEMAI [58] Physics
Curriculum Sequencing Systems SITS [59] Computer Programming
ITUTOR [60] Basic Computer skills
RCOS [61] Basic Computer course
Intelligent Problem-Solving Analyzers

The table above contains some of the systems in the literature which can be classifies as intelligent tutoring systems, and
the table below summarizes some of the adaptive hypermedia systems.

Table 3: Adaptive Hypermedia Systems

NAME DOMAIN
ISIS-Tutor [62] Formatting of a language
WEST-KBNS [63] Generic Hypermedia architecture
ACE [64] individualized courseware
ART-Web [65] Art practice
Albatros [66] Current Computer Technology
AHA [67] Generic Hypermedia architecture
MetaLinks [68] Authoring tools
INTERSIM [69] Medical education
MANUEL EXCEL [70] Excel spreadsheets
TAILOR Device description
PAKMAS Abstract data modelling

4. FUTURE WORK IN THE AREA

Although the systems reviewed and discussed in the
previous sections provide a great deal of differentiation
but almost all the systems are tested on a limited number
of participants and the results so achieved cannot be used
to generalize the results for larger audiences, also the
applicability of the variables in the learner profile in the
online scenario have not been evaluated efficiently
Most of the systems still use either the diffused, naïve or
the self-regulated approaches to provide differentiated
content, research in this area should concentrate to
identify problems in such systems, also in the
amalgamation of techniques from these different types of
systems to develop a hybrid approach which can employ
different approaches to provide the best possible
differentiation to the content.
Differentiation is based three important learner
characteristics, readiness, interest and learning profile,
there is little research done to find the readiness of the
learner, since studies have proved that readiness is an
important parameter on which differentiation is based on.
Interest, another important parameter is misinterpreted or
not interpreted at all, the assumption that the student is
interested in the concept is made by default and that is
why he is taking the course, so it is assumed that the
student is really interested in the concepts. Another
success in this area would be creating interest for an
uninterested learner in a particular learner by using
prescriptive data analytics.
Learner profiles in systems which provide customization
or personalized learning usually are made of the learning
style, or cognitive style or preferences of the learner.
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
Research in this direction is the using of different
characteristics of the learner and create a learner profile
which in addition to the learner’s readiness and interest
can be used to provide the differentiation. Other learner
characteristics may include the emotion, cultural
differences, aptitude, intelligence quotient and all other
differences which can be used to create better user
profiles.
The learner profile is usually created by asking the
students, questions about his preferences and for
interpreting the learning style, questionnaires are used.
The only difference in the traditional and this approach
being the use of mouse clicks on selecting an answer and
clicking on next, whereas the latter one employed a pen
and paper approach. Efficient techniques which are
unobtrusive in nature and methods which do not increase
the frustration of the user should be incorporated for
automatic interpretations for parameters that are used to
create the learner profile.
Natural language processing, the storm that shook the
entire research community can be incorporated in the
differentiated online learning systems to cater to student
from different cultural backgrounds, so that even non-
native users of the system may also find it beneficial and
it can help learners actually benefit from the course even
if it is not in the language they speak and understand.
Also authoring tools should be designed to support
natural language resource creation.
Differentiated instruction theory can be used to create
better problem-solving learning approaches by providing
personalized feedback and also the use of natural
language dialogs will prove beneficial to the learner who
uses the problem-solving approach to fulfill his learning
objectives. Different instructional designs should be
integrated and hybrid approaches to learner must be
created and also evaluated to understand their usability
and applicability
Technological developments in authoring systems which
are used to create content, automation in the production
of different media formats resources, some of the
authoring tools in the market come with the problem of
difficulty in using them. The teacher finds it difficult to
create the resources and it takes a lot of time. The
Graphical Interface of authoring tools should be simple
and it should make the resource producing content
process, an easy task. Another issue in this area is the
open resources, more awareness should be created on the
use of open resources and resources can be modified
instead of creating them from scratch.
5. CONCLUSION
E-learning is online learning, and research is being
conducted to make it more feasible for a larger variety of
audiences, and also tailored and customized to match
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 200
individual learner profiles, this customization and
tailoring of instruction is based upon the theory of
differentiated instruction which says that in order for the
learning to be effective, the teacher should modify the
content, process, product and affect according to the
needs and demands of the learners. Instruction is
differentiated on the basis of readiness, interest and
learning profile. The learning profile consists of other
characteristics such as learning style, cognitive style,
learning strategy, affective state etc. Some of the systems
in the review which produce and deliver differentiated
instruction are reviewed, some of the problems identified
are listed in the section above. All in all, differentiated in
online learning is the area in focus, research needs to be
conducted to build more efficient systems which
integrates different types of differentiation which will
adapt over time and also help in automated production of
differentiated content.
6. REFERENCES
[1] Comenius, J. A. A Reformation of Schools (1642). Uspace,
Communicate and Collaborate. The University of
Sheffield, Feb 10, 2011. Web. 8 Feb. 2014.
[2] Dewey, John. My Pedagogic Creed. The School Journal,
Vol. LIV, No. 3. 1897. Web. 10 Feb.2014.
[3] Vygotsky, L. Interaction between learning and
development. Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1978. Print.
[4] Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory.
[5] Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of
multiple intelligences. Basic books.
[6] Langa, M. A., and Janice L. Y. Curriculum Mapping for
Differentiated Instruction, K-8. Callifornia, USA: Corwin
Press, 2007. Print.
[7] Sternberg, R.J., and Li-fang Zhang, Styles of Thinking as a
Basis of Differentiated Instruction. Theory into Practice,
245-253, n.d. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.
[8] Tomlinson, C. A., and Cindy A. Strickland. Differentiation
in Practice. Alexandria, USA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development. 2005. Print.
[9] Thorndike, E. L. (1935). The psychology of wants,
interests and attitudes. Oxford, England: Appleton-
Century.
[10] Schindler, A. W. (1948). Readiness for
learning. Childhood Education, 24(7), 301-304.
[11] Seligman, M. E. (1970). On the generality of the laws of
learning. Psychological Review, 77(5), 406-418
[12] Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008).
Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological
science in the public interest, 9(3), 105-119.
[13] Allport G. W, 1937, personality: a psychological
interpretation, New York, Holt and Co.
[14] Riding, R.J. and Cheema I, 1991, cognitive styles: an
overview and integration and educational psychology, 11,
193-215
[15] Hartley J, 1998 learning and studying: a research
perspective, London: Routledge
[16] Coffield, F, Moseley, D, Hall, E & Ecclestone, K 2004,
Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a
systematic and critical review, LSRC reference, Learning
& Skills Research Centre, London,
[17] Panksepp, Jaak (2005). Affective neuroscience: the
Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid
foundations of human and animal emotions ([Reprint] ed.).
Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press
[18] Damasio, AR (May 1998). "Emotion in the perspective of
an integrated nervous system". Brain research. Brain
research reviews. 26 (2-3): 83–6.
[19] Davidson, edited by Paul Ekman, Richard J. (1994). The
Nature of emotion: fundamental questions. New York:
Oxford University Press
[20] Cabanac, Michel (2002). "What is emotion?" Behavioural
Processes 60(2): 69-83.
[21] Daniel L. (2011). Psychology Second Edition. 41 Madison
Avenue, New York, NY 10010: Worth Publishers. p. 310.
[22] "Theories of Emotion". Psychology.about.com. 13
September 2013
[23] Bower, G.H. (1981) Mood and Memory, American
Psychologist, 36(2), 129-148.
[24] Isen, A.M., Daubmann, K. & Nowicki, G. (1987) Positive
affect facilitates creative problem solving, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122-1131
[25] Fredrickson, B.L. (2001) The Role of Positive Emotions in
Positive Psychology, American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-
226.
[26] Greene, T. &Noice, H. (1988) Influence of Positive Affect
upon Creative Thinking and Problem Solving in Children,
Psychological Reports, 63, 895-898.
[27] Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W. & Perry, R.P. (2002)
Academic Emotions in Students’ Self-Regulated Learning
and Achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative
research, Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91-105.
[28] Frenzel, A.C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R. & Sutton,
R.E. (2009) Emotional Transmission in the Classroom:
exploring the relationships between teacher and student
enjoyment, Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3),
705-716.
[29] Dochy, F. J. R. C., Moerkerke, G., &Segers, M. (1999).
The effect of prior knowledge on learning in educational
practice: Studies using prior knowledge state
assessment. Evaluation & Research in Education, 13(3),
114-131.
[30] Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge, and
learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37-54.
[31] Hewson, P. W. (1982). A case study of conceptual change
in special relativity: The influence of prior knowledge in
learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4(1), 61-
78.
[32] Hailikari, T., Katajavuori, N., & Lindblom-Ylanne, S.
(2008). The relevance of prior knowledge in learning and
instructional design. American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 72(5), 113.
[33] Trivantis (2005) Present Day Custom eLearning
[34] Hopkins, D. (2004) Assessment for personalised learning:
The quiet revolution. Perspectives on Pupil Assessment,
New Relationships: Teaching, Learning and
Accountability, General Teaching Council Conference.
London, England
[35] Gifford, B. R. (2001) Transformational Instructional
Materials, Settings and Economics. The Case for the
Distributed Learning Workshop. Minneapolis, MN, The
Distributed Learning Workshop
[36] Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. & Wiliam, D.
(2002) Working Inside the Black Box: Assessment for
Learning in the Classroom, London, King's College.
[37] Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998) Inside the Black Box:
Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment. Phi
VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 201
Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
[38] Tomlinson, C. A. &Mctighe, J. (2006) Integrating
Differentiated Instruction + Understanding by Design:
Connecting Content and Kids, Alexandria, VA,
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
[39] Brusilovsky, P., &Peylo, C. (2003). Adaptive and
intelligent web-based educational systems. International
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
(IJAIED), 13, 159-172.
[40] Brusilovsky, P. (1999). Adaptive and Intelligent
Technologies for Web-based Education. Künstliche
Intelligenz, (4), 19-25.
[41] Psotka, J. & Mutter, S. A. (1998). Intelligent Tutoring
Systems: Lessons Learned. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
ISBN 0-8058-0192-8
[42] Brusilovsky, P. (1996). Methods and techniques of
adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted
Interaction, 6 (2-3), 87-129.
[43] Peylo, C., Teiken, W., Rollinger, C., and Gust, H. (1999):
Der VC-Prolog-Tutor: Eine Internet-basierte
Lernumgebung. Künstlich eIntelligenz , (this issue)
[44] Weber, G. and Specht, M. (1997): User modeling and
adaptive navigation support in WWW-based tutoring
systems. In: Jameson, A., Paris, C. and Tasso, C. (eds.)
User Modeling. Springer-Verlag, Wien 289-300
[45] Henze, N., Naceur, K., Nejdl, W., and Wolpers, M. (1999):
Adaptive hyperbooks for constructivist teaching.
KünstlicheIntelligenz, 4 26-31
[46] Eliot, C., Neiman, D., and Lamar, M. (1997): Medtec: A
Web-based intelligent tutor for basic anatomy. In:
Lobodzinski, S. and Tomek, I. (eds.) Proc. of WebNet'97,
World Conference of the WWW, Internet and Intranet,
Toronto, Canada, AACE 161-165
[47] Stern, M. K. and Woolf, B. P. (1998): Curriculum
sequencing in a Web-based tutor. In: Goettl, B. P., Halff,
H. M., Redfield, C. L. and Shute, V. J. (eds.) Intelligent
Tutoring Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin 574-583.
[48] Vassileva, J. (1997): Dynamic Course Generation on the
WWW. In: Boulay, B. d. and Mizoguchi, R. (eds.)
Artificial Intelligence in Education: Knowledge and Media
in Learning Systems. IOS, Amsterdam 498-505.
[49] Wang, C., Wang, D. Z., & Lin, J. L. (2010). ADAM: An
adaptive multimedia content description mechanism and its
application in web-based learning. Expert Systems with
Applications, 37(12), 8639-8649.
[50] Capuano, N., Marsella, M., & Salerno, S. (2000, June).
ABITS: An agent based Intelligent Tutoring System for
distance learning. In Proceedings of the International
Workshop on Adaptive and Intelligent Web-Based
Education Systems, ITS.
[51] Ritter, S. (1997, August). PAT Online: A Model-tracing
tutor on the World-wide Web. In Proceedings of
Workshop" Intelligent Educational Systems on the World
Wide Web" at AI-ED, Vol. 97, No. 8, pp. 11-17.
[52] Faulhaber, S. and Reinhardt, B. (1997): D3-WWW-
Trainer: Entwiklungeiner Oberflächefür die
Netzanwendung. Technische Universität München,
München 31-40.
[53] Alpert, S. R., Singley, M. K., and Fairweather, P. G.
(1999): Deploying Intelligent Tutors on the Web: An
Architecture and an Example. International Journal of
Artificial Intelligence in Education 10 (1999) 183-197.
[54] Warendorf, K. and Tan, C. (1997): ADIS - An animated
 Fareeha Rasheed and Abdul Wahid VSRDIJTNTR, Vol. IX (IV) April 2018 / 202

data structure intelligent tutoring system or Putting an Web-Based Teachware Management. In Proceedings of
interactive tutor on the WWW. In: Brusilovsky, P., ER’99 Workshop on theWorld-WideWeb and Conceptual
Nakabayashi, K. and Ritter, S. (eds.) Proc. of Workshop Modeling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1727,
"Intelligent Educational Systems on the World Wide Web" Berlin: Springer-Verlag,
at AI-ED'97, 8th World Conference on Artificial 
Intelligence in Education, Kobe, Japan, ISIR 54-60.
[55] López, J. M., Millán, E., Pérez-de-la-Cruz, J. L., and
Triguero, F. (1998): ILESA: A Web-based Intelligent
Learning Environment for the Simplex Algorithm. In:
Alvegård, C. (ed.) Proc. of CALISCE'98, 4th International
conference on Computer Aided Learning and Instruction in
Science and Engineering, Göteborg, Sweden 399-406.
[56] Paiva, A. and Machado, I. (1998): Vincent, an
autonomous pedagogical agent for on-the-job training. In:
Goettl, B. P., Halff, H. M., Redfield, C. L. and Shute, V. J.
(eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 584-593
[57] Hooshyar, D., Ahmad, R. B., Yousefi, M., Fathi, M.,
Horng, S. J., & Lim, H. (2016). SITS: a solution-based
intelligent tutoring system for students’ acquisition of
problem-solving skills in computer
programming. Innovations in Education and Teaching
International, 1-11.
[58] Kusairi, S., Alfad, H., &Zulaikah, S. (2017). Development
of Web-Based Intelligent Tutoring (iTutor) to Help
Students Learn Fluid Statics. Journal of Turkish Science
Education (TUSED), 14(2).
[59] Jones, D., & Newman, A. (2001). RCOS. java: a simulated
operating system with animations. Teaching package 1.
[60] Jones, D., & Newman, A. (2001). RCOS. java: a simulated
operating system with animations. Teaching package 1.
[61] Brusilovsky, P., &Pesin, L. (1994, May). ISIS-Tutor: An
intelligent learning environment for CDS/ISIS users.
In Proc. of the interdisciplinary workshop on complex
learning in computer environments (CLCE94) (pp. 29-33).
[62] Eklund, J. and Sawers, J.: Customising Web-based course
delivery in WEST® with navigation support. In: Proc. of
WebNet'96, World Conference of the Web Society, San
Francisco, CA, AACE (1996) 534-535
[63] Specht, M. and Oppermann, R. (1998): ACE - Adaptive
Courseware Environment. The New Review of
Hypermedia and Multimedia 4, 141-161
[64] Weber, G. (1999): ART-WEB, Trier, University of Trier.
[65] Lai, M.-C., Chen, B.-H., and Yuan, S.-M. (1995): Toward
a new educational environment. In: Proc. of 4th
International World Wide Web Conference, available
online at
http://www.w3.org/pub/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/238/
[66] De Bra, P. and Calvi, L. (1998): AHA! An open Adaptive
Hypermedia Architecture. The New Review of
Hypermedia and Multimedia 4 115-139
[67] Murray, T., Condit, C., and Haugsjaa, E. (1998):
MetaLinks: A preliminary framework for concept-based
adaptive hypermedia. In: Proc. of Workshop "WWW-
Based Tutoring" at 4th International Conference on
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS'98), San Antonio, TX
[68] O'Keefe, R. M. (1985). Truly interactive simulation: Inter-
SIM. In SCS Conference on Modeling and Simulation on
Microcomputers: pp. 131-137.
[69] Paris, C. The Use of Explicit User Models in a Generation
System for Tailoring Answers to the User’s Level of
Expertise. In A. Kobsa and W. Wahlster: 1989, User
Models in Dialog Systems, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
[70] Süs, C., Freitag B., Brössler, P. (1999). Meta-Modeling for

View publication stats