Journal of Critical Reviews

ISSN- 2394-5125 Vol 7, Issue 6, 2020

Review Article

BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE

LITERATURE
Marsha Lavania1*, Faizah Bt Mohamad Nor1
1Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia.
*marshalavania@gmail.com

Received: 13.02.2020 Revised: 17.03.2020 Accepted: 25.04.2020

Abstract
Differentiated Instruction (DI) is a well-known and well-debated pedagogical approach that gives importance to the fulfilment of
student needs (Tomlinson; 2000, Jacobse; 2019). However, many studies found that although this well-known approach has been
introduced to most educational institutions, there still lie challenges that hampers its implementation. The current review intends to
set an overview of the barriers that teachers face in the implementation and incorporation of DI in classroom teaching and learning.
A total of 19 empirical studies were chosen for thorough review upon meticulous selection criteria. The findings showed that there
are numerous challenges that teachers face. The challenges were listed and classified into 11 different categories and the most
common challenge that teachers face is the lack of DI knowledge with 63.3% of frequency. It was also found that certain challenges
were the effect of other mentioned challenges. A framework was formed in this study; categorising the challenges into governable
and ungovernable factors. This review framework will ease researchers and teachers in working out the challenges that could be
dealt with personally and the challenges that require the interference of other parties. It also provides a summary of the challenges
that teachers face in DI implementation from 2014 till 2019.

Key words: Differentiated Instruction, DI implementation, Self-efficacy.

© 2019 by Advance Scientific Research. This is an open-access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.06.51

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Given the disparity in classrooms across the globe and taking
into consideration the importance of providing meaningful
learning for each learner, the “one size fits all” approach could
be said to be lacking in various ways. Thus, the need to
Differentiate Instruction (DI) is eminent in ensuring that
learners are provided with sufficient avenues of learning in
order to make the most of their learning process (Moreno;
2015). Tomlinso (2000) defined DI as teachers catering to
students’ needs, either individually or in small groups, rather
than teaching using the same method or strategy for all the
learners in a particular classroom. Other researchers briefly
defined it as “varied instruction” by Tkogko (2008) and
“contrast instruction” by Al-Laqani (2003) (in Aldossari;
2018). Although it carries various term, the idea is the same
modifying teaching and learning to suit students.
DI is a renowned approach in the education field and is
prevalent in most education systems. Policymakers suggest
and enforce the use of DI within education institutions in order
to sustain high-quality education in mixed-ability classrooms
(Schleicher; 2016, Jacobse; 2019, Schofield; 2010). With
changes in policy, challenges and complications are inevitable.
Although DI is prominent in the education field, teachers are
still left with many doubts on how DI should be incorporated
in the classroom and how potential challenges could be
overcome (Van Casteren; 2017). DI could bring a great deal of
positive outcomes if incorporated well into teaching and
learning (Deunk; 2018). Therefore, the challenges that
teachers face need to be scrutinised and dealt with in order to
ensure effective DI implementation in classrooms.
For the purpose of this review, 19 studies, ranging from the
year 2014 till 2019, on challenges teachers face in
differentiated instructions were analysed. Studies of which
31.6% encompassed quantitative, 10.5% qualitative and
57.9% mixed method. The selection of these empirical studies
was done through a few steps. First a systematic search was
conducted through online databases. The chosen articles then
went through a set of selection criteria. The selection criteria
included factors such as DI in schools, teachers as participants,
year of publication and empirical study. 19 studies were
chosen out of 28 after the selection criteria were applied.
On the whole, these studies agree that teachers face various
challenges with many focussing only on students and the
others incorporated the numerous factors and sources that
could be a challenge for teachers in incorporating
differentiated instruction.
CHALLENGES TEACHERS FACE IN DIFFERENTIATED
INSTRUCTION
Although the concept of DI is recognised as one of the most
advantageous incorporation when catering to mixed ability
classes (Chien; 2015, Pettig; 2000), many teachers face various
challenges in its implementation. The challenges range from
external factors such as support from school management till
internal factors such as self-efficacy.
Quantitative and qualitative studies revealed that teachers
face challenges relating to knowledge of DI (Wan; 2016, Chien;
2015, Lunsford; 2017, Suprayogi; 2016, Jager; 2017, Tobin;
2014, Avgousti; 2017, Boston; 2017, Robinson; 2014; Mariyam
Shareefa; 2019, Siam; 2016, Merawi; 2018), knowledge of
teaching and learning methodology (Jager; 2016, Wan; 2016,
Lunsford; 2017, Boston; 2017), personal teaching beliefs
(Wan; 2015, Jager; 2017, Boston; 2017) and personal
characteristics (Dixon; 2014, Tobin; 2014, Suprayogi; 2017,
Merawi; 2018).
Dixon (2014) make certain that teacher training courses on DI
are crucial in preparing teachers for the challenges it brings
and how to face it effectively. Teachers’ insufficient knowledge
of DI proved to be a base factor that led to many problems in
the implementation of DI. The lack of familiarity with DI
preceded teachers’ feelings of insecurity and
misunderstanding (Tobin; 2014, Avgousti; 2017, Mariyam
Shareefa; 2019, Siam; 2016) of the employment of
differentiation strategies in the classroom. The challenge that
relates to the lack of knowledge on DI is due to the deficiency
in the number or quality of training and emphasis on the said
subject (Jager; 2017, Boston; 2017, Lunsford; 2017; Robinson;
2014). Even though the lack of knowledge about DI has been
an impactful challenge that contributed to the significantly low
usage of DI, Suprayogi (2016) in his study in a school in
Indonesia revealed that despite teachers having sufficient
knowledge of DI, the usage of DI was still significantly low.

Journal of critical reviews 293

 BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Similar revelation was also found in the feedback received
from middle school teachers in Georgia, where teachers are
well-equipped with the knowledge and advantages of DI but
still withheld its practice due to other factors (Lunsford;
2017). This finding shows that even though lack of DI
knowledge is a challenge, but it is not the chief reason why DI
is not being used. On a similar perspective, Merawi (2018)
reported that teachers have high perception of DI, but they do
not have sufficient knowledge of DI due to lack of training,
which causes teachers to employ the “one-size-fits-all”
approach.
Despite being teachers, lack of sound knowledge in relation to
teaching and learning methodology has been one of the
challenges highlighted in the literature. Jager (2016) indicated
in her study which employed questionnaires and interviews as
tools in investigating South African public secondary school
teachers’ perspectives of DI, that the teachers lack knowledge
in identifying students’ learning difficulties as well as in
modifying the curriculum to meet the needs of the students.
Besides lacking knowledge in the abovementioned area,
teachers lacking the knowledge in DI is also a major challenge
for teachers. Chien (2015) and Lunsford (2017) found that
lacking knowledge in DI affected teachers’ confidence in
differentiating their lessons. Their motivation and confidence
are affected to the extent that they choose not to differentiate
their lesson in the fear that they might lose control of the
lesson flow or classroom management. However, there are
also studies that prove this factor diminutive. For instance,
Aldossari (2018) who carried out a survey with similar aims
concluded that the teachers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia did
state that the lack of knowledge on DI is a problem but the
statistics of the study showed that it was “less problematical”
compared to other challenges.
It is a natural tendency for teacher with or without teaching
experience to have one or more preferred teaching style or
approach. Differentiated instruction, though it sounds teacher-
centred, is highly student-centred in most instances. This is
due to the elevated importance and attention given in catering
to students’ needs. Therefore, teachers who are more prone to
use teacher-centred teaching methodology tend to face
challenges in employing DI (Wan; 2016, Jager; 2017).
Literature has also shown how personal characteristics could
be a challenge for teachers in the implementation of DI in
classroom teaching. Suprayogi (2017) and Wan (2015)
emphasised a significant relationship between self-efficacy
and DI implementation. Teachers with high self-efficacy tend
to have relatively high DI incorporation in their classroom
teaching. Both studies showed positive findings in the
abovementioned relationship. However, Wan (2015)
mentioned a few factors that affected the self-efficacy of
teachers; namely personal teaching beliefs and class
management, which in return would then affect the
incorporation of DI. The low commitment of teacher reported
by Merawi (2018) as a barrier to DI implementation affects
self-efficacy in a way that it becomes very difficult to attain.
Although low commitment reflects personal challenges, it was
said that it could have its roots in external challenges like lack
of appreciation in the form of incentives for outstanding work.
Apart from internal challenges, the employment of DI in
teaching and learning poses challenges from external factors
as well. The literature revealed many factors that form as
barriers to effective DI implementation such as time (Wan;
2016, Maddox; 2015, Chien; 2015, Lunsford; 2017, Tobin;
2014, Avgousti; 2017, Boston; 2017, Robinson; 2014, Mariyam
Shareefa; 2019, Siam; 2016), students (Aldossari; 2018, Wan;
2016, Maddox; 2015, Jager; 2017, De Neve; 2016), school
administration and facilities (Aldossari; 2018, Jager; 2017,
Avgousti; 2017, Stollman; 2018, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019,
Siam; 2016, Merawi; 2018), nature of DI (Maddox; 2015,
Aldossari; 2018), curriculum (Aldossari; 2018, Jager; 2017,
Chien; 2015, Tobin; 2014) and class size (Aldossari; 2018,
Wan; 2015, Suprayogi; 2016, Jager; 2017, Stollman; 2018,
Suprayogi; 2017, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019).
Journal of critical reviews
Time, which includes preparation time and instruction time, is
a large determining factor in ensuring effective DI
implementation (De Jager, 2013; Van Casteren et al., 2017).
Through interviews, Jager (2016) concluded that teachers face
difficulty due to time constraint where they have insufficient
time in catering to various needs and ensuring that students
comprehend what is being taught. Time was also one of the
factors listed by Chien (2015) and Mariyam Shareefa (2019)
when the challenges faced by teachers in Taiwan and Brunei
respectively were analysed. Although time was not a factor
mentioned in Aldossari’s (2018) study, the nature of DI was
mentioned as one of the challenges and acknowledging the fact
that the administration of DI consumes more time compared
to other teaching methodologies, the time factor is still valid in
this study. Teachers in Saudi Arabia faced challenges
pertaining to students, the nature of DI and school
environment. On the other hand, insufficient lesson
preparation time also makes DI difficult to implement. Due to
the nature of DI which demands extra modification to teaching
aids, support given or classroom grouping in order to cater to
groups of varying proficiency levels, teachers find it as heavy
workload compared to the existing workload they have (Jager;
2017, Maddox; 2015).
Students were also one of the highly occurring factors that
contribute to the barriers of DI implementation. Besides the
well-diverse classrooms (Maddox; 2015, De Neve; 2017,
Aldossari; 2018), unprepared (Aldossari; 2018) and
undisciplined (Jager; 2017) students serve more complication
as teachers intend to differentiate classroom teaching. As one
of the strategies of DI is to have collaborative work in groups
(Tomlinson; 2005), disciplined and intrinsically motivated
students make DI a success. In order to have students who are
intrinsically motivated to learn, they must first be aware of
what and how they are learning. Aldossari (2018) found that
one of the barriers the teachers face was that students were
not aware of the importance and significance of DI and that
students are too used to traditional teaching methods.
However, catering to students’ needs in learning creates
boosts their self-esteem, which in turn creates the drive for
students to contribute or take part in classroom activities.
The factors that are not in teachers’ hands to change or modify
are the facilities, school administration and curriculum. The
support, influence and understanding of the school
administration is crucial in providing teachers with the means
necessary for effective DI implementation (Stollman; 2018;
Aldossari; 2018, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019). However, Aldossari
(2018) and Avgousti (2017) report that their teacher
participants do not receive sufficient support from the
administration which make it more strenuous to carry out a DI
lesson. Besides lack of support, teachers are also loaded with
too much responsibilities which restrict them from spending
time for lesson preparation (Jager; 2017, Merawi; 2018).
Considering the classroom themselves, teachers’ responses
illustrated that classrooms are not equipped with facilities that
help facilitate DI (Jager; 2017, Aldossari; 2018, Merawi; 2018).
This could be due to the lack of support for the staff and also
DI, from the school administration. The abovementioned
reason could also be the cause for teachers facing challenges in
finding the right teaching materials or resources for their DI.
Maddox (2016), Lunsford (2017), Avgousti (2017), Merawi
(2018) and Jager (2017) reported that teachers face challenges
in searching for material resources for their lessons. Ample
resources are a necessity for both teachers and students in
effective employment of DI. Furthermore, another obstacle
teachers face is that the nature of the curriculum that has been
set is described as not DI-friendly. Curriculum that are dense
with topics, chapters and fields to cover makes it challenging
for teachers to differentiate the lesson as they fear not being
able to fulfil the curriculum at the end of a term or year
(Aldossari; 2018, Chien; 2015, Jager; 2017, Tobin; 2014).
A factor that 40% of the empirical studies considered for this
review termed as a challenge is the class size. All six studies
refer to the class size as the number of students per classroom.
The high number of students per classroom makes it tougher
for teachers to differentiate the lesson. This is due to the rise in
294
 BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

the diversity, needs, number of groups formed, time taken for In summary, the literature between 2014 till 2019 revealed 11
product delivery and complication of classroom management different barriers teachers face in implementing DI. The table
(Aldossari; 2018, Wan; 2015, Suprayogi; 2016, Jager; 2017, below summarises the barriers in descending order with its
Stollman; 2018, Suprayogi; 2017, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019). respective percentage.

Table 1: Barriers that teachers face in DI from the literature (2014-2019)

NO. BARRIERS STUDIES FREQUENCY
(%)
1 Lack of DI knowledge Wan; 2016, Chien; 2015, Lunsford; 2017, Suprayogi; 2016, Jager; 2017, 63.2
Tobin; 2014, Avgousti; 2017, Boston; 2017, Robinson; 2014, Mariyam
Shareefa; 2019, Siam; 2016, Merawi; 2018
2 Time constraints Wan; 2016, Maddox; 2015, Chien; 2015, Lunsford; 2017, Tobin; 2014, 52.6
Avgousti; 2017, Boston; 2017, Robinson; 2014, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019,
Siam; 2016
3 Class size Aldossari; 2018, Wan; 2015, Suprayogi; 2016, Jager; 2017, Stollman; 36.8
2018, Suprayogi; 2017, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019
4 School Aldossari; 2018, Jager; 2017, Avgousti; 2017, Stollman; 2018, Mariyam 36.8
administration/facilities Shareefa; 2019, Siam; 2016, Merawi; 2018
5 Lack of resources Maddox; 2016, Lunsford; 2017, Avgousti; 2017, Jager; 2017 Siam; 2016, 36.8
Merawi; 2018, Mariyam Shareefa; 2019
6 Students Aldossari; 2018, Wan; 2016, Maddox; 2015, Jager; 2017, De Neve; 2016 26.3
7 Lack of teaching methodology Jager; 2016, Wan; 2016, Lunsford; 2017, Boston; 2017, 21.1
knowledge
8 Curriculum Aldossari; 2018, Jager; 2017, Chien; 2015, Tobin; 2014 21.1
9 Personal Characteristics Dixon; 2014, Tobin; 2014, Suprayogi; 2017, Merawi; 2018 21.1
10 Personal teaching Wan; 2015, Jager; 2017, Boston; 2017 15.8
beliefs/styles
11 Nature of DI Maddox; 2015, Aldossari; 2018 10.5

From the table, it could be seen that the lack of DI knowledge
is the most common barrier faced by teachers in the
employment of DI; followed by time constraints. This finding
should be taken into serious consideration as although
teachers’ perception of DI is high, they are not able to
implement something they do not know much about. Besides
that, time constraint is also a challenge expressed by most
teachers in this study. Proper time management and
reasonable workload will go a log way in helping teachers
familiarise themselves with DI. Class size, school
administration/ facilities and lack of resources hold 36.8%
each. However, it should not be taken lightly as these barriers
could be the cause to other problems (Merawi; 2018). For
instance, the lack of support from the school administration
could be one of the causes for teachers to feel demotivated in
employing DI.
BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATION INSTRUCTION; A
FRAMEWORK
Considering the barriers listed above, they could be
categorised into two main categories; namely internal and
external. Internal challenges refer to the barriers that teachers
face internally; in other words, the challenges they face within
themselves, and external barriers refer to the otherwise. These
challenges that could be further classified into governable and
ungovernable, by the teachers. Governable factors refer to the
ones that teachers are able to control or modify whereas the
ungovernable factors refer to the factors which are otherwise.
Therefore, the barriers to effective implementation of DI,
retrieved from the literature, can be illustrated in a framework
as follows;

Knowledge of DI
Preferred teaching
style/method
Internal Governable Knowledge of
teaching
methodology
Personal
characteristics
BARRIERS
TEACHERS
FACE IN DI Preparation time
Governable Students
Lack of resources

External
Instruction time
Facilities &
Administration
Ungovernable
Curriculum
Nature of DI
Class size

Figure 1: Barriers that teachers face in DI

The figure above shows a framework to categorise the governable factors because the status of each factor could be
challenges teachers face in DI. The knowledge of DI, preferred altered if teachers make the corresponding effort in doing so.
teaching style/method, knowledge of teaching methodology For instance, there are many physical and virtual sources
and personal characteristics has been grouped under where teachers can refer to in order to enrich their knowledge

Journal of critical reviews 295

 BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
of DI. Preferred teaching style or method could also be
changed in accordance to the aim of the lesson. There are no
internal barriers that are ungovernable due to the existence of
various possibilities in which teachers could alter the barriers.
As for external barriers, there are both governable and
ungovernable barriers as certain issues still lie in the teachers’
hands. For instance, if the problem is that students are
unaware of the nature and benefit of DI, teachers could
educate students on the reasons behind differentiation
strategies so that students are aware of the advantages.
However, there are certain factors that are considered
ungovernable by teachers. Instruction time is standardised
across schools and cannot be altered by the teacher.
Curriculum, school facilities and administration are of the
similar nature as instruction time. The class size, although
often differs, is not managed by teachers but the school
administration. The same description applies to the nature of
DI where it has been standardised and widely accepted and
teachers only have the choice of whether to adopt or adapt it.
CONCLUSION
DI could be labelled as an all-inclusive approach to learning
and teaching. Therefore, in ensuring effective implementation
of this approach, great attention should be given to the
challenges each stakeholder face. The literature that has been
studied for the purpose of this review revealed many
challenges from various perspectives, faced by many teachers
from various background, cultures and practices. This review
was successfully able to classify these challenges into common
categories that could be generalised across the findings. It
could be seen that lack of DI knowledge, time and class size
were the barriers with the highest frequency across the
selected empirical studies.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The limited number of studies that were taken into
consideration for this review is the most salient limitation.
Many studies were chosen, and seven studies were filtered out
due to the mismatch between the aims of the study and that of
this review. Only studies focusing on the challenges that
teachers face in DI implementation were considered to be
reviewed. Further studies could also include the challenges
faced by students and make comparisons between the two; as
it will reveal if there is common factor that could be dealt with
in improving circumstances for both teachers and students.
Besides that, another limitation is that for certain papers, it
was difficult to determine the quality of the studies due to the
lack of information. For instance, how were the teachers
chosen, whether they were teaching the same subjects or how
was the interview conducted and sample versus population.
The current study focussed on the challenges that teachers
face across the whole DI implementation. Further studies
could focus on the challenges that teachers face in relation to
content, process, product or environment (Tomlinson; 2000).
Alternatively, it could also look into the challenges that
teachers face while catering to the three classification given by
Tomlinson (2000) which are students’ interests, readiness and
learning profile.
Given its importance, it is imperative to note that there are still
too few studies focusing on the challenges that teachers face in
DI. This is due to the vast factors that could influence the type
of challenges teachers face. More studies involving teachers
from different countries should be conducted to see if the
barriers they face are the same. It is crucial step to take as the
full potential of DI can only be seen if most of these barriers
are overcome.
REFERENCES
1. Moreno, S. (2015). Differentiated Instruction: Strategies
for English Language Learners Listening Comprehension
Development. (Masters Thesis). Bridgewater State
University. United States of America.
2. Tomlinson C. A. & Allan, S. (2000). Leadership for
Differentiating Schools and Classrooms, ASCD, Alexandria
: Virginia.
Journal of critical reviews
3. Aldossari, E. T. (2018). The Challenges of Using the
Differentiated Instruction Strategy: A Case Study in the
General Education Stages in Saudi Arabia. International
Education Studies. Vol. 11(4). 74-83. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1175296.pdf.
4. Schleicher, A. (2016). Teaching Excellence Through
Professional Learning and Policy Reform: Lessons from
Around the World. Paris: International Summit on the
Teaching Profession; OECD Publishing.
5. Jacobse S. A. E, Meijer, A., Helms-Lorenz, M. and Maulana,
R. (2019) Differentiated Instruction in Secondary
Education: A Systematic Review of Research
Evidence. Front. Psychol. 10:2366. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366
6. Schofield J. W. (2010). International evidence on ability
grouping with curriculum differentiation and the
achievement gap in secondary schools. Teach. College
Rec. 112, 1492–1528. Retrieved
from https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=
15684
7. Van Casteren W., Bendig-Jacobs J., Wartenbergh-Cras F.,
Van Essen M., Kurver B. (2017). Differentiation and
Differentiation Skills in Secondary Education. Nijmegen.
(Translated)
8. Deunk M. I., Smale-Jacobse A. E., de Boer H., Doolaard S.,
Bosker R. J. (2018). Effective differentiation practices: a
systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the
cognitive effects of differentiation practices in primary
education. Educ. Res. Rev. 24, 31–54.
10.1016/j.edurev.2018.02.002
9. Chin-Wen Chien (2015) Analysis of Taiwanese
elementary school English teachers’ perceptions of,
designs of, and knowledge constructed about
differentiated instruction in content, Cogent Education,
2:1, 1111040, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2015.1111040
10. Pettig, K.L. (2000). “On the road to differentiated
practice.” Educational Leadership, 58(1), 14-18.
11. Wan, S. W. Y. (2016). Differentiated instruction: are Hong
Kong in-service teachers ready? Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice. Vol. 23, (3). 284-311. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1204289
12. Lunsford, K. J. (2017). Challenges to Implementing
Differentiated Instruction in Middle School Classrooms
with Mixed Skill Levels (PhD Thesis). Walden University.
Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations
13. Suprayogi, M.N. & Valcke, M. (2016). Differentiated
Instruction in Primary Schools: Implementation and
Challenges in Indonesia. PONTE, Vol.72 (6), 2-18.
Retrieved from 10.21506/j.ponte.2016.6.1
14. Jager, T. de. (2016). Perspectives of teachers on
differentiated teaching in multi-cultural South African
secondary schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 53,
115- 121.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.004
15. Tobin, R., & Tippett, C. D. (2014). Possibilities and
potential barriers: Learning to plan for differentiated
instruction in elementary science. International Journal
of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 423-443.
16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9414-z
17. Avgousti, M. (2017). One Size Does Not Fit All:
Understanding Differentiated Instruction in Elementary
Mixed-Ability Classrooms. (Masters Thesis). University of
Toronto. United States of America.
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/7692
6/1/Avgousti_Melbo_201706_MT_MTRP.pdf
18. Boston, A. (2017). An Action Research Study of Barriers
to Differentiated Instruction in Reading for Georgia
Middle School Students in the Inclusive Classroom. (PhD
Thesis). United States of America.
19. Robinson, L., Maldonado, N., & Whaley, J. (2014).
Perceptions about implementation of differentiated
instruction. In The Annual Mid-South Educational
Research (MSERA) Conference (pp. 1–22). Knoxville,
Tennessee
296
 BARRIERS IN DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

20. Mariyam Shareefa, Visal Moosa, Rohani Mat Zin, Nor

Zaiham Midawati Abdullah and Rosmawijah Jawawi.
(2019). Teachers’ Perceptions on Differentiated
Instruction: Do Experience, Qualification and Challenges
Matter? International Journal of Learning, Teaching and
Educational Research. Vol. 18(8).214-226.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.8.13
21. Siam, K., & Al-Natour, M. (2016). Teacher’s differentiated
instruction practices and implementation challenges for
learning disabilities in Jordan. International Education
Studies, 9(12), 167 –181.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n12p167
22. Merawi, T. M. (2018). Primary school teachers’
perceptions of differentiated instruction (DI) in Awi
Administrative Zone, Ethiopia. Bahir Dar j Educ., 18(2),
152–173.
23. 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. Retrieved from
http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=http://sea
rch.proquest.com/docview/165183
9369?accountid=14771
24. De Neve D. & Devos G. (2016). The role of environmental
factors in beginning teachers' professional learning
related to differentiated instruction. Sch. Effect. Sch.
Improv. 27, 557–579.
http://10.1080/09243453.2015.1122637
25. Stollman S. H. M. (2018). Differentiated Instruction in
Practice: A Teacher Perspective. (PhD Thesis). Leiden:
ICLON, Leiden University Graduate School of Teaching.
26. Maddox, C. (2015). Elementary (K-5) teachers’
perceptions of differentiated instruction. (PhD Thesis).
Available from Walden University.

Journal of critical reviews 297