Authors : Llianie A. Salvante; Manuel V. Estera

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/ys6ydbny

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2662kxcx

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jan539

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study examined the adaptive teaching practices of teachers handling learners with learning difficulties at Barcelona Central School, focusing on how instructional responsiveness can be enhanced through supportive systems and professional development. Guided by the principles of learners with learning difficulties, the research aimed to identify the adaptive strategies currently implemented, determine teachers’ perceptions of their effectiveness, explore the barriers encountered, and assess the availability of institutional support that promotes adaptive practices. Anchored on the idea that quality education must be equitable and accessible to all, the study sought to provide actionable insights for improving the teaching and learning experiences of learners with learning difficulties. Using a descriptive research design, data were gathered from teachers through survey questionnaire and documentary analysis. Results revealed that teachers consistently apply adaptive strategies such as visual aids, scaffolding, peer collaboration, and differentiated instruction to accommodate diverse learner needs. Teachers perceived these practices as highly effective in improving comprehension, participation, and confidence among learners with difficulties. However, findings also indicated significant challenges, including limited access to instructional materials and assistive technologies, insufficient training, and inconsistent administrative support. Despite these barriers, teachers demonstrated creativity, commitment, and compassion in ensuring inclusive learning environments. The study concluded that adaptive teaching is both a pedagogical and moral commitment that reflects the teacher’s dedication to equity and learner success. To sustain adaptive teaching practices, the study recommends continuous professional development, strengthened administrative support, and resource allocation aligned with learners with learning difficulties policies. Ultimately, the research underscored that the realization of learners with learning difficulties depends on empowering teachers as catalysts of transformation who embody empathy, adaptability, and excellence in every classroom.

Keywords : Adaptive Teaching, Learners with Learning Difficulties, Learners with Learning Difficulties, Instructional Responsiveness, Professional Development, Teacher Support System.

References :

1. Alegre, A., & Molinari, G. (2021). Teacher–student relationships and dropout intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 103247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103247
2. Ardasheva, Y., Tretter, T. R., & Kinny, M. (2018). English language learners and inquiry-based science instruction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 536-549.
3. Baeten, M., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2019). Effects of reflective scaffolding. Studies in Higher Education, 44(1), 65-78.
4. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
5. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
6. Begeny, J. C., et al. (2018). Small group reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 47(2), 178-190.
7. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard University Press.
8. Caprara, G. V., et al. (2018). Academic self-efficacy interventions. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 367-395.
9. CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
10. Chang, C.-C., & Yang, F.-Y. (2019). E-learning modules and stress. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1058-1070.
11. Çiftçi, S., & Cin, M. (2021). Gamification in mathematics. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 433-451.
12. Collie, R. J., et al. (2019). School climate and engagement. School Psychology Quarterly, 34(2), 119-131.
13. Darling-Hammond, L., et al. (2019). Integrated reforms. Educational Researcher, 48(6), 366-378.
14. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
15. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
16. Dommett, E. J., Gardner, B., & Van Tilburg, W. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning. Computers & Education, 142, 103641.
17. Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2019). Growth mindset. American Psychologist, 74(6), 713-729.
18. Evans, P., et al. (2020). Creative arts integration. Journal of Educational Research, 113(4), 265-277.
19. Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R. S., & Falik, L. H. (2010). Beyond smarter: Mediated learning and the brain’s capacity for change. Teachers College Press.
20. Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111
21. Freeman, B., Marginson, S., & Tytler, R. (2017). Problem-based STEM. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 55-72.
22. Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2016). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (8th ed.). Pearson.
23. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99.
24. García, E., & Weiss, E. (2019). The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought. Economic Policy Institute.
25. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books
26. Goetz, T., et al. (2016). Academic emotions. Learning and Instruction, 44, 117-127.
27. Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., & Chanal, J. (2021). Academic motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 64, 101948.
28. Guo, J., et al. (2016). Expectancy-value theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45, 26-35.
29. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
30. Hughes, M. T., et al. (2019). Tutoring and literacy gaps. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 52(4), 321-333.
31. Hwang, G.-J., Lai, C.-L., & Wang, S.-Y. (2017). Mobile flipped classrooms. Computers & Education, 115, 82-95.
32. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2016). Autonomy-supportive teaching. Motivation and Emotion, 40(4), 526-541.
33. Kim, J., Park, M., & Jang, H. (2018). Problem-based learning for underachievers. Asia Pacific Education Review, 19(4), 543-555.
34. Kim, M., et al. (2019). Mindfulness and test anxiety. Mindfulness, 10(3), 502-512.
35. Koçdar, S., et al. (2018). Learning analytics dashboards. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(6), 745-757.
36. Korpershoek, H., et al. (2016). Classroom management meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 643-680.
37. Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. (2016). Student-centered learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 707-730.
38. Lee, H., & Recker, M. (2021). Motivational feedback. Computers & Education, 161, 104060.
39. Liu, E. Z.-F., He, Y.-C., & Zhu, Z.-T. (2017). Teacher support and self-efficacy. Educational Studies, 43(2), 236-252.
40. Lu, C., Chen, T., & Chen, Y. (2018). Project-based learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 45.
41. Martin, A. J., & Evans, P. (2018). Academic buoyancy. School Psychology International, 39(1), 88-106.
42. Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2018). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective differentiated instruction (5th ed.). Pearson.
43. McCombs, B. L., & Miller, L. (2007). Learner-centered classroom practices and assessments: Maximizing student motivation, learning, and achievement. Corwin Press.
44. McInerney, D. M., et al. (2019). Culturally relevant pedagogy. International Journal of Educational Research, 94, 1-13.
45. Niemi, H., & Kumpulainen, K. (2020). Digital collaboration. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 755-779.
46. Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Self-assessment meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 22, 74-98.
47. Raufelder, D., et al. (2016). Peer networks and motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 242-250.
48. Rea, P., McLaughlin, V., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pull-out programs. Council for Exceptional Children, 68(2), 203–222.
49. Schneider, M., et al. (2020). Feedback practices. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 153-178.
50. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
51. Sklad, M., et al. (2020). Social-emotional learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 581036.
52. Sousa, D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2011). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience supports the learner-friendly classroom. Solution Tree Press.
53. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
54. Thompson, C. J., et al. (2018). Formative assessment and mastery. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1114-1125.
55. Tomas, L., et al. (2020). Peer-assisted learning in math. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(7), 827-841.
56. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
57. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
58. UNESCO. (2020). Inclusion and Education: All Means All. Global Education Monitoring Report.
59. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
60. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
61. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
62. Wang, M.-T., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2018). Teacher self-efficacy. Learning and Instruction, 55, 63-73.
63. Westbrook, J., et al. (2018). Active learning in low-resource settings. International Journal of Educational Development, 60, 103-115.
64. Yildirim, B., & Kizilkaya-Cumhur, D. (2020). STEM and persistence. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(2), 237-252.
65. Zhao, Y., et al. (2020). Metacognitive training. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, 100631.