University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Foreign-language teachers' needs to achieve better results: the role of differentiated instruction

(USC Thesis Other)

Foreign-language teachers' needs to achieve better results: the role of differentiated instruction

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

FOREIGN-LANGUAGE TEACHERS’ NEEDS TO ACHIEVE BETTER RESULTS: THE
ROLE OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION

by

Jing Zhou

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2020

Copyright 2020 Jing Zhou

ii
Acknowledgments

In humble gratitude to all the professors at USC, especially the dissertation team: Dr.
Cathy Krop, Dr. Alexandra Wilcox, Dr. Monique Datta, and Dr. Rong Yuan. Thank you very
much for your support throughout the dissertation process. Thank you also to my family and
friends for giving me the opportunity to study and persevere.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 1
Description of the Organizational Context and Mission 2
Organizational Goal 3
Related Literature 3
The Importance of Addressing the Problem 6
Description of Stakeholder Groups 7
Stakeholder Group of Focus 8
Stakeholder Performance Goals 9
Purpose of the Study 10
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework 11
Organization of the Study 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review 12
Introduction 12
History and Current Status of Foreign Language Education in the United States 12
Hindrances to the Development of FL in the U.S. Education System 14
Current U.S. Adult Foreign-Language Proficiency 15
Causes of Adult Learners’ Low Foreign Language Acquisition in the U.S. 16
Lack of Qualified Foreign Language Teachers 16
Inconsistent Foreign Language Instruction System 16
Neurological Constraints to Adult Foreign Language Acquisition 17
Adult Language-Learning Strategy 19
Current Teaching Approaches for Achieving High-Level Language Proficiency 20
Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Adult Foreign Language Acquisition 23
The Potential Benefits of Implementing DI in Adult FLA 24
Successes in Implementing Differentiated Instruction 25
Implementation of Differentiated Instruction 26
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework 28
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 28
Knowledge and Skills Influences 29
Motivational Influences 33
Organizational Influences 38
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholder’s Knowledge and 43
Motivation with the Organizational Context
Conclusion 46
Chapter Three: Methodology 47

iv
Participating Stakeholders 48
Stakeholder’s Role in Organizational Change 49
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 50
Sampling Strategy and Timeline 51
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation 52
Interviews 53
Data Analysis 54
Credibility and Trustworthiness 54
Ethics 55
Limitations 57
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 59
Participating Stakeholders 60
Determining Continuing Needs and Current Assets 61
Findings of Assumed Knowledge Needs 61
Teachers Must Know What Differentiated Instruction Entails 63
Teachers Must Know How to Conduct Differentiated Instruction 64
Teachers Must Be Able to Reflect on Teaching and Evaluate 66
When to Adjust Their Methods
Teachers Must Know How to Connect Research to Practice 67
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Knowledge Needs 69
Summary Results and Findings for Knowledge Needs 72
Findings of Assumed Motivational Needs 73
Teachers Must Believe that Differentiated Instruction Can Help 74
Students Achieve the Educational Goal
Teachers Must Believe that They Can Effectively Implement 76
Differentiated Instruction
Teachers Must Believe that Their Colleagues Can Effectively 77
Implement DI
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Motivational Needs 79
Summary Results and Findings for Motivational Needs 80
Findings of Assumed Organizational Needs 81
The Organization Must Foster a Culture of Teamwork 83
The Organization Must Foster a Culture of Empowering First- 84
Line Teachers
The Organization Must Provide the Necessary Resources to Conduct 85
Differentiated Instruction
The Organization Must Have an Effective Accountability System 88
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Organizational Needs 89
Summary Results and Findings of Organizational Needs 92
Emerging Themes 93
Building a Safe Professional-Development Platform 94
Implementing an Effective Accountability System 95
Creating an Effective Mechanism to Improve Collaboration 95
Summary of Assumed Needs and Emerging Themes 96
Chapter Five: Recommendation, Implementation, and Evaluation 98
Introduction and Overview 98

v
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 98
Knowledge Recommendations 98
Motivation Recommendations 103
Organization Recommendations 106
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 112
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 112
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 113
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 113
Level 3: Behavior 115
Level 2: Learning 117
Level 1: Reaction 120
Evaluation Tools and Data Analysis for Reporting 121
Future Research 123
Conclusion 124
References 126
APPENDIX A 148
Interview Protocol for Foreign Language Teachers 148
APPENDIX B 151
Interview Protocol for Language-School Leaders 151
APPENDIX C 154
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Pre-Course Survey 154
APPENDIX D 156
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Post-Course Survey 156
APPENDIX E 159
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Follow-Up Survey 159
APPENDIX F 161
Sample Survey to Evaluate the Implementation of the Program 161
APPENDIX G 163
Sample Survey to Monitor the Support From Direct Supervisor 163
APPENDIX H 165
Sample Survey to Evaluate the Long-term Effectiveness of the DI Program 165

vi
List of Tables

Table 1: Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals 9

Table 2: Knowledge Influences 32

Table 3: Motivation Influences 37

Table 4: Organization Influences 41

Table 5: Description of Participating Stakeholders 60

Table 6: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Needs 62

Table 7: Summary of Assumed Motivational Needs 74

Table 8: Summary of Assumed Organizational Needs 82

Table 9: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 99

Table 10: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 103

Table 11: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 107

Table 12: Leading Indicators, Metrics, and Methods for External and 114
Internal Outcomes

Table 13: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 115

Table 14: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 116

Table 15: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 119

Table 16: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 120

vii
List of Figures

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 44

viii
Abstract
This study addresses the problem of WCFLI language teachers’ needs in helping adult foreign-
language learners to attain higher proficiency levels through differentiated instruction. The
purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis regarding differentiated instruction in the
areas of WCFLI teachers’ knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational resources. This
research included interviews of 12 WCFLI language teachers with a record of helping students to
achieve higher language-proficiency levels, who shared their teaching experiences and their
thoughts about differentiated instruction. The study also interviewed three WCFLI leaders to
gather their perspectives on the topic. The findings indicate that differentiated instruction is
essential for helping students to reach higher levels of language proficiency. The resulting data
presents three emerging themes: building a safe professional-development platform,
implementing an effective accountability system, and creating an effective mechanism to
improve collaboration. In Chapter 5, the researcher has provided solutions based on literature
and data for closing the perceived needs gaps, as well as recommendations for an
implementation and evaluation plan.

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
This study addressed the problem of language teachers’ needs in helping adult foreign
language learners reach higher proficiency levels through differentiated instruction. This is
important because of the increasing need for a workforce with foreign-language proficiency for
commerce and national security and the challenges involved with attaining a high level of
language proficiency when learning a new language as an adult. Language teachers play an
important role in adult learners obtaining a high level of language proficiency (Kessler &
Hubbard, 2017). The United States has not systematically invested in or prioritized K-12 foreign-
language education (Friedman, 2015; Mitchell, 2017; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011) leaving language
acquisition to adulthood to fill workplace needs. The number of American adults whose foreign-
language proficiency is good enough to use as a second language is very small after learning a
foreign language (FL) as an adult (Lambert, 1992). Notably, fewer than 1% of American adults
are proficient in a FL they learned in a classroom (Friedman, 2015), which also suggests the
challenges language teachers are facing in a foreign language classroom (Boers & Webb, 2018).
It is meaningful to help adult language learners to reach higher proficiency level for a
variety of reasons. According Damari et al.’s (2017) survey, 93% of the 2,100 U.S. employers
prefer their employees to be multilingual to improve business effectiveness, because those
employees will have smoother communication with customers from foreign countries. From the
perspective of national security, since World War II, the U.S. government has recognized the
importance of foreign-language competence in its employees (“News and Notes,” 1942). After
the Cold War, the U.S. government continued to demonstrate a high demand for government
employees with high-level foreign-language ability to ensure national security (Clifford &
Fischer, 1990). In the twenty-first century, as internet translation software started to develop,

2
U.S. Department of the Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary Everette Jordan still noted that
foreign-language skills superior to the level of translation software were vital for national
security (Interview with Everette Jordan, 2002). More recently, foreign-language translation
remains an area that AI cannot conquer because languages contain annotations and cultural
nuances that require inferences which only humans can understand (Pring-Mill, 2018). As such,
for commerce, national security, and other reasons, it is important to help adult foreign-language
learners achieve higher levels of proficiency (“Reverse the Decline,” 2017). To help foreign
language learners reach a higher foreign language proficiency, language teachers are one of the
key elements (Kessler & Hubbard, 2017).
Description of the Organizational Context and Mission
The organization of focus in this study was the West Coast Foreign Language Institute
(WCFLI) (a pseudonym) located in California. The mission of this institute is to offer the best
and most efficient foreign-language education to its students (West Coast Foreign Language
Institute, 2018, “Mission”). The WCFLI has approximately 1,800 faculty members and currently
has around 3,500 students who are native English speakers enrolled in a FL, and they study that
language six hours a day in the classroom for the duration of the course, the length of which
depends on the difficulty of the target language. These students are enrolled to receive in-job
training because their future job will be closely related to the FL learned. Their learning is
sponsored by their working organizations. All students are at least 18 years old with a high-
school degree (although some have a bachelor’s degree or higher) and from a variety of racial
and ethnic backgrounds. After completing the Basic language course, students should have
attained Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) guideline (“Interagency Language
Roundtable”, 2018) level 2/2/2 (listening / reading / speaking).

3
Organizational Goal
The West Coast Foreign Language Institute (WCFLI) is currently going through a series
of organizational changes. Because the previous goal of students attaining ILR level 2/2/1+ had
been fully achieved for a number of years, in 2017 the Institute’s leadership set a new, more
ambitious global goal for the Basic language course. The most updated global goal is that by the
end of 2023, all students in the Basic course will attain level 2+/2+/2, a half-level higher in all
three skills than the present goal. Those who do not attain the goal might be recycled to the next
class or disqualified from their professional positions.
Improving the institution’s performance regarding the institutional goal is essential.
Reaching the goal not only ensures that the institution will maintain its leading role in the
language education field but also directly impacts the steady source of students, which further
determines the funding allocated to the institution by the government. Regularly evaluating the
school’s performance will encourage stakeholders to take initiative in detecting inefficient
operations and refining current methodologies.
Related Literature
Considerable research illuminates the difficulties adults experience in attaining high
proficiency in a new language (Brooks & Darhower, 2014; Burke, 2013; Chambless, 2012;
Darhower, 2014; Glisan, 2013; Glisan et al., 2013; Huhn, 2012; Magnan et al., 2014; Tedick,
2013). Language teachers need to consider the factors that contribute to the challenges adults
experience when learning a new language (Boers & Webb, 2018).
To start with, adults have neurological disadvantages in acquiring and maintaining a new
language (Chai et al., 2016; Cui, 2018). Neurological studies have shown that maturation of the
brain closes the door for active language learning because the interaction and connectivity of the
brain is no longer as efficient (Chai et al., 2016). Although the adult is more skilled in logical

4
analysis and utilizing strategies during language learning (Saito, 2017), the goal for language
learning is to use the language rather than simply understanding it (Cui, 2018). Learning
strategies are not always as helpful in actual language production, and, in fact, might hinder the
language fluency that is characteristic of high-level language proficiency (Brooks & Kempe,
2013). In addition to these unfavorable objective conditions, some subjective factors also affect
adult foreign-language learning. Children typically have a more supportive language-learning
environment than adults (Durlak & Dupre, 2008). This support can come from family, school,
and society. While adults are considered contributors to the family and society, they are seldom
supported in continuing their education (Kam et al., 2003). Besides these factors, language
teachers should also be aware of the dysfunction of the language education system (Mitchell,
2017).
Foreign-language education ideally comes at the primary and secondary education level,
not only because children have a better aptitude for learning a FL, but also because modern
society focuses on FL acquisition during these years. Unfortunately, the United States has not
systematically invested in or prioritized K-12 foreign-language education (Friedman, 2015;
Mitchell, 2017; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011). The underdevelopment of language education widens
the gap between the United States and European students in foreign-language proficiency
(Devlin et al., 2018; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011). In the EU, language is considered one of the five
key skills (Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011). If an adult learned a FL in youth, it is easier to learn a
second FL (“Language Education,” 2018). Most European children study their first FL between
the ages of six and nine, and a second for at least a year during their compulsory education
(Devlin & Pew Research Center, 2018). European children typically have foreign-language
classes three to four hours every week (“Language Education,” 2018). In the United States, most
foreign-language classes start in high school (“Language Education,” 2018), and only 20% of K-

5
12 students learn a FL at all (Mitchell, 2017). The U.S. government does not require that children
learn a FL, and the number of opportunities for children to do so has been decreasing: in 2008,
25% of elementary schools offered foreign-language education (Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011), but by
2012 only 15% did (“The End of Foreign Language Education,” 2018). Middle schools that offer
FLs declined 17% from 1997 to 2008 (“Reverse the Decline,” 2017). As a result, two-thirds of
European adults know more than one language because they acquired this skill in K-12, while
only one-fifth of Americans received FL education (“Reverse the Decline,” 2017).
While there are advantages to learning a foreign language as a child or teenager, some
practices have nonetheless shown success for teaching a foreign language to adults. For example,
communicative language teaching (Ahmad & Rao, 2012), task-based language teaching (Wills &
willis, 2007), and differentiated instruction (Tulbure, 2013). Communicative language teaching
promotes communicative competence through learner-centered and experience-based teaching
techniques (Richards & Rodgers, 2014), and task-based teaching focuses on exchanging
information in a real-life situation (Van den Branden, 2009). However, each of these teaching
approaches demonstrates limitations when applied in an unsuitable teaching context (Richards &
Burns, 2012). Therefore, while teachers are admitting CLT and TBLT’s effectiveness, they
should first understand their students and teaching context in order to apply suitable teaching
methods. Differentiated instruction addresses the issue of a diverse teaching context and is “an
approach by which teaching is varied and adapted to match students’ abilities using systematic
procedures for academic progress monitoring and data-based decision-making” (Guay et al.,
2017, p. 224). Francisco et al. (1998) suggested that using different teaching methods in the same
classroom could address students’ unique needs and increase student involvement, which
improves students’ performance. Many other studies also suggest that differentiated instruction

6
improves the learning outcome of adult learners (Chamberlin & Powers, 2010; Iurea et al., 2011;
Rogers, 2009; Tulbure, 2013). Chapter Two will discuss these studies in detail.
While U.S. adults fall behind adults in other countries in language acquisition,
workplaces are increasingly calling for multilingual employees. According to Friedman (2015),
one in five jobs is tied to international trade. Any oral or written conversation associated with
international trade requires a high level of foreign-language proficiency. Therefore, it is
important to address the problem of helping language teachers find a teaching practice that
enables adult learners to reach a high level of language proficiency.
The Importance of Addressing the Problem
It is important to address the problem of helping language teachers find a teaching
practice that will push students to a higher level of language proficiency. First, according to
Friedman (2015), enrollment in higher education for FLs declined by more than 111,000 students
between 2009 and 2013, and only 7% of college students enrolled in FLs in 2013. Friedman
(2015) posits the reason is not that people do not want to learn, but that they think they will not
be able to acquire and maintain a FL. This kind of self-doubt in language will limit people’s
achievements in other subjects, because they will avoid opportunities to study abroad or
communicate with foreign professionals (Friedman, 2015). When immigrants accept job
opportunities worldwide, U.S. monolingual speakers face more significant challenges than ever
before (Hinton, 2016). Therefore, language teachers need to help rebuilt learners’ confidence.
Second, because of the modern globalization process, being able to speak a FL at a high
proficiency level is a vital skill for world citizens (Herron, 1982). Although English is still the
unofficial (and sometimes official) language for trade and politics, world situations are changing
daily, and language readiness is key to staying on top of the fierce competition (Friedman, 2015).
Therefore, it is necessary to learn a foreign language and be able to function in a higher

7
proficiency level. Third, if this problem is not addressed promptly and correctly, it will diminish
the overall quality of the population’s learning skills (“Reverse the Decline,” 2017). The
language learning process not only provides language learners another language to communicate
in other than English, but also trains and expands learners’ cognitive abilities, too (Friedman,
2015). Therefore, language teachers are not only teaching a foreign language but also cultivating
learners overall learning abilities.
Language instruction is also a matter of U.S. national defense (Clifford & Fischer, 1990;
Government and Foreign Language Teaching, 1942; Interview with Everette Jordan, 2002). In
some national defense positions, mistakes caused by low foreign-language proficiency can
literally lead to death (Interview with Everette Jordan, 2002). As such, for many national defense
organizations—for example the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Central
Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the U.S. Information Agency, and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation—a high level of proficiency in a FL is not simply a preference
but a requirement (Clifford & Fischer, 1990). Accordingly, there are many important reasons to
help improve adult foreign-language learning.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
At WCFLI, there are three main stakeholder groups: leaders, teachers, and students (see
Table 1), all of whom play important roles in achieving the organization’s goal for students to
reach higher levels of language proficiency in the Basic course. The teachers prepare efficient
curricula and conduct quality instruction. Students give their best effort and cooperation toward
their own language achievement (Demirbolat, 2006). In many cases, students are dependent on
achieving a high level of language acquisition to continue in their work positions. Finally,
leaders provide overall vision, hire qualified teachers and arrange teacher trainings, to support
the process (Taylor & Thelin, 2015).

8
Stakeholder Group of Focus
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical
purposes, this research focuses on the stakeholder group of teachers and how their performance
contributes to achieving the organization global goal. Teachers are a key element to goal
achievement, and the ones over which the organization’s policies are designed to impact
performance. In order to achieve the 2+/2+/2 goal, teachers must provide an efficient curriculum,
adopt effective teaching methods, utilize valid and reliable assessment tools, and give
constructive feedback (Demirbolat, 2006). These require a well-qualified and trained teaching
group. Consistent professional training will better equip teachers in their classroom (Salgür,
2014). As such, the stakeholder goal for teachers is that by the end of October 2022, all teachers
will demonstrate high quality differentiated instruction skills through teacher training provided
by the organization. This goal will be achieved by administrators generating a new teacher-
training program. The WCFLI has its own faculty-development department with a group of
academic professionals who are experienced in quality instructional training. The leaders’ goal
for a new teacher training program will feed into the teacher goal of increased skills and
competencies to provide high quality instruction.
Evaluating the stakeholders’ performance related to the organization’s global goal of all
students enrolled in the Basic course attaining higher levels of language proficiency is essential.
A joint effort among all stakeholders is necessary to achieve the organization global goal.
Reaching the goal not only ensures that the institution will maintain its leading role in the
language education field but also directly impacts the flow of students, which further determines
the funding allocated to the Institute by the government. Regularly examining the institution’s
performance encourages stakeholders to take initiative in detecting inefficient operations and
perfecting current methodology to achieve the goal.

9
Stakeholder Performance Goals
The organization’s stakeholders’ goals are stepping stones to achieving the overall
organizational goal. Leaders work to generate an efficient training program that provides
teachers with necessary knowledge and skills. The teachers’ goal is to take the training provided,
introduce the practices including differentiated instruction into their classrooms, and become
certified after mastering the pedagogical techniques. The students’ goal of improved language
proficiency is also the organization’s goal, which they can achieve by studying diligently and
cooperating with teachers in all learning activities.
Table 1.
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The West Coast Foreign Language Institute’s mission is to offer the best and most efficient
foreign language education to its students.
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of fiscal year 2023, all students from the Basic course will attain the expected ILR
level 2+/2+/2.
Leader Goal Teacher Goal Student Goal

10
By October 2021, Leaders will
provide support to
differentiated instruction
training that is necessary for
teachers to help students reach
2+/2+/2.
By the end of October 2022,
all teachers will demonstrate
high quality differentiated
instruction skills through
teacher training provided by
the organization.
By the end of fiscal year 2023,
all students will be able to
graduate their Basic course
without delay for academic
reasons.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this project was to conduct a needs’ analysis in the areas of knowledge
and skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary for teachers to help students reach
the organizational performance goal. The analysis will begin by generating a list of possible
needs and will then move to examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated
needs. While a complete needs’ analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes
the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis was the teachers.
The questions that guide this study are the following:
1. What knowledge is required for teachers to facilitate students’ attainment of a high level
of language proficiency through differentiated instruction?
2. What motivation is required of teachers to facilitate students’ attainment of a high level
of language proficiency?
3. What is the connection between organizational culture and teachers’ knowledge of
differentiated instruction and motivation?
4. What are the recommended solutions for the issues raised here in the areas of knowledge
of differentiated instruction, motivation, and organizational culture?

11
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is a method that helps to identify organizational
performance goals and the discrepancies between the goals and current status. The discrepancies
are the gaps between the actual status of the organization and the desired outcome within an
organization. The assumed interfering knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements are
generated based on the author’s knowledge on the topic and related literature. These elements
will be examined in this study by using interviews, literature review, and content analysis.
Research-based solutions will be recommended and evaluated.
Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about FL proficiency. The
organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders as well as the initial concepts of gap analysis
were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature surrounding the scope of
the study. Topics of history and current situation of FL education, challenges for adult language
learners compared to children, and teachers’ role in achieving high-level language proficiency
will be addressed. Chapter Three details the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
elements as well as methodology with respect to the choice of participants, data collection and
analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides
solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as well as
recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan.

12
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This literature review examines adult FL learning and the role of teachers in adult
learners reaching mastery level in a foreign language. The review begins with the general
research on the history and the importance of reaching mastery level in FL for adult language
learners. Subsequently, the review discusses the difficulties for language learners to learn a FL as
an adult. Next, the review elaborates on the elements that are vital for teachers to be aware of
when helping language learners reach mastery level, including the role of the teacher in creating
a practical language learning environment and adopting effective teaching approaches.
Following the general research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap
Analytic Conceptual Framework and an examination of the problem of practice through the lens
of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on performance.
History and Current Status of Foreign Language Education in the United States
The United States established a strong social environment for developing FL education,
and started FL education with established standards earlier than many other countries, as early as
the 1890s. However, many factors have since hindered the development of FL education in the
United States, and now other contexts, such as European countries, are far more advanced in this
area.
The United States has a long history of FL education (“Language Education by Region,”
2018), and it is the birth country of the audio-lingual method (“The History of Foreign Language
Education,” n.d.). As early as 1893, the U.S. National Education Association (NEA) organized a
ten-person committee to set standards for language learning. The goal was to promote language
education in elementary and secondary schools. After the Korean War in about 1953, the Army
language method, today known as the audio-lingual method, become prevalent in regular schools

13
(“The History of Foreign Language Education,” n.d.). Learning a FL opens the door to another
culture and life during peacetime. However, during wartime, learning a FL directly connects with
national security and sociopolitical situations (Pavlenko, 2003). According to Pavlenko (2003),
knowledge of a critical FL can help decode and interpret essential information to help ensure the
nation is in a dominant position during war. However, just as FL education was beginning to
thrive in the United States, the federal government reduced funding for FL education between
1967 and 1973 even though the Vietnam War was still on going. A domino effect led to the
decline of college FL enrollment, followed by the elimination of elementary FL programs (“The
History of Foreign Language Education,” n.d.). By 1998, 84% of American four-year higher
education institutions did not require a FL for entry (“The History of Foreign Language
Education,” n.d.). Only recently, some U.S. elementary schools have initiated immersion
programs (“The History of Foreign Language Education,” n.d.). Despite this increase in FL
education availability through immersion programs, enrollment in FLs is still very low. By 2013,
only 7% of college students were enrolled in FL classes (Friedman, 2015), and by 2015 only
20% of students at any level of education were enrolled in a FL course (“The End of Foreign
Language Education,” 2018).
At the same time, other countries, including those in the European Union, have caught up
with and surpassed the United States in FL education in a short period of time. European
countries did not have any formal FL education policy until 1974. In 1974, one FL was
compulsory across European countries except Ireland and the UK. However, in 1995 the
European Commission’s white paper announced that all citizens should know two FLs, and three
years later the study of one FL become compulsory in schools (“Language Education by
Region,” 2018). Currently, European countries have “national-level mandates” and FL education
is implemented by most K-16 schools, while the U.S. does not have a nationally accepted

14
standard (Devlin & Pew Research Center, 2018). According to Pufahl and Rhodes (2011), the
achievement gap in FL education between the United States and European countries is
increasing. Even though the United States is richly endowed by its history and social
environment, the development of FL education has been hindered for a variety of reasons.
Hindrances to the Development of Foreign Languages in the U.S. Education System
The United States is a nation of immigrants, but for a number of geographic, political,
and social reasons, this has not spurred the United States to build and develop its FL education
system (Stein-Smith, 2016). In principle, the United States is a melting pot for all cultures and
languages. However, most first-generation immigrants adopted English immediately after they
settled, or not long after (Nieto, 2009), and the second generation of immigrants naturally
assimilated to the dominant culture and language (Stein-Smith, 2016). Therefore, only 25% of
Americans can have a real conversation in a language other than English– a figure that includes
immigrants and their children (Stein-Smith, 2016).
Geographic conditions constrained efforts for the United States to become a multilingual
country. The United States is located on the North American continent, with the Pacific Ocean
on the west and the Atlantic Ocean on the east. The only country to the North is Canada, whose
official language is also English. To the South is Mexico which speaks Spanish. Residents of the
United States only need to learn Spanish to communicate and bond with neighbor countries.
However, according to Nieto (2009), socioeconomic factors determined that English would be
the dominant language in North America. Immigrants from Mexico, trying to build a better life
in the United States and historically the minority in the United States, adapted to the American
culture and language as they migrated other than impose their language and culture on American
people (Nieto, 2009). In addition to the geographic barrier, political considerations are another
significant factor in America’s monolingualism (Stein-Smith, 2016). In 1917, the U.S. Congress

15
passed the Burnett Act requiring all immigrants to pass an English language proficiency test and
banning immigration from Asia except Japan and the Philippines. Further, in 1926, President
Roosevelt claimed that English proficiency was equivalent to loyalty to the country. Such early
political moves discouraged the development of a FL education system (Nieto, 2009).
Consequently, the United States does not promote FL education. A FL was not needed
for 84% of higher education institutions in 1998 (“The History of Foreign Language Education”,
n.d.), and enrollment for FL classes in public elementary schools is as low as 15% (Pufahl &
Rhodes, 2011), even though this is the ideal age for FL acquisition (Niall McLaughlin, 2013).
The lack of promotion of FL instruction in the U.S. education system has caused the failure of
students’ FL proficiency (Lambert, 1992), which further affects adult FL learning.
Current U.S. Adult Foreign-Language Proficiency
According to Pufahl and Rhodes (2011), the FL proficiency gap between U.S. adults and
other countries is widening. This is concerning as a multilingual workforce is increasingly called
on for commerce reasons (Hazel & Svennevig, 2018). Two out of three European adults know
more than one language, while only 20% of Americans do. Watson and Wolfel (2015) described
279 American third- and fourth-year university students taking the Defense Language
Proficiency Test (DLPT) to test fluency in Chinese, Arabic, or Russian (which are considered
difficult for native English speakers) and French, German, Portuguese, or Spanish, (which are
less difficult). Students scored only Novice in listening and reading for difficult languages and
only Intermediate in less-difficult languages. Friedman (2015) also found that U.S. students’ FL
proficiency level is low for both Western and non-Western languages. His findings suggest that
fewer than 1% of American adults are proficient in a FL learned in a U.S. FL classroom.
Similarly, Tschirner (2016) collected data from 3,000 FL majors who studied seven
different languages at 21 universities. The results showed that the FL majors had difficulty

16
achieving Advanced proficiency in listening and were able to reach the minimum level 2 for
reading only after four years of study. There are many reasons for such underwhelming results
for adults learning a FL in the United States.
Causes of Adult Learners’ Low Foreign Language Acquisition in the U.S.
Language teachers should be aware that many reasons contribute to the adult learners’
low FL proficiency. Two main and interconnected reasons in the United States continuously
mentioned in the literature are the lack of qualified FL teachers and an inconsistent FL
instruction system. Additional causes are neurological constraints to adult FL acquisition and
poorly developed adult language-learning strategies.
Lack of Qualified Foreign Language Teachers
Lack of qualified FL teachers has been a significant issue in the United States for
decades. Pufahl and Rhodes (2011) noted that 25% of elementary and 30% of secondary schools
report a shortage of FL teachers. Further, many of the limited adult FL teachers available have a
proficiency level below formal requirements, which is caused by inefficient FL education when
they were FL students and can lead directly to low performance from their students (Friedman,
2015). Teacher training is also an issue. As far back as 1977, Herold (1977) noted significant
gaps in the training of FL teachers. The lack of a government initiative to create a system to
certify FL educators (Lambert, 1992) also contributes to the limited number of qualified teachers
(Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011; Friedman, 2015).
Inconsistent Foreign Language Instruction System
Another cause of inconsistent FL instruction is that FL organizations and teachers have
different definitions for FL proficiency (Wiggins, 2013; Mitchell, 2017). The U.S. government
and military have adopted the Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) scale developed by the
Interagency Language Roundtable. In contrast, in the civilian academic field, many organizations

17
and teachers apply the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL)
proficiency guidelines, created by experts in the FL education field (2012). Some FL educators
still use their own definitions of proficiency, despite the existence of the two “standard”
guidelines. Some teachers conclude that simply speaking and writing a FL freely counts as
fluency, but few think about defining mastery in more detail (Wiggins, 2013). Others believe that
fluency and mastery vary with a student’s purpose in learning a language (Fotheringham, 2018).
These different definitions of proficiency make it difficult to have a unified goal for FL learning.
As such, it is difficult to develop a consistent assessment tool to evaluate students’ learning
progress (Lambert, 1992; Mitchell, 2017; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011).
Moreover, with different goals and assessment systems used by different FL teachers, FL
learners experience different sets of curricula (Mitchell, 2017). Sometimes, even when FL
students have learned a FL for several years before they enter college, they must nonetheless
start over again, because the college is using a different set of curriculum and assessment system
(Mitchell, 2017). It is hard to conduct appropriate placement without leaving proficiency gaps.
This situation hinders students’ FL learning progress (Lambert, 1992). In order to develop high
proficiency in a FL, it is essential not only to have qualified FL teachers but also to follow a
consistent FL learning system (Lambert, 1992; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011).
Neurological Constraints to Adult Foreign Language Acquisition
As mentioned earlier, the inconsistent United States’ K-12 language education system
determines that FL acquisition largely relies on adulthood, while neurological studies have
shown that adults have more challenges than children when learning a new language (Brooks &
Kempe, 2013; Chai et al., 2016; Gullberg et al., 2010; Qi et al., 2017; Sokolik, 1990). Gullberg et
al. (2010) demonstrated that adult learners are good at learning complex linguistic knowledge but
not at retention or lexical learning. Even though adults are faster in morphosyntax acquisition

18
(Slavoff & Johnson, 1995), the inflectional and plural morphemes will remain in a non-native
state (Long, 2003). The maturation of the brain constrains language learning because an adult has
a lower nerve growth factor which means a lower speed of learning (Sokolik, 1990).
Additionally, Chai et al. (2016) asserted that resting-state connectivity in the brain is related to
FL performance. Spontaneous lexical retrieval in FL, which is the ability to form specific lexical
words in FL to convey specific concept efficiently, is one of the main challenges for adult FL
acquisition. Chai et al.’s research found that interactions of the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG)
and posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG) in the brain significantly influence this language
ability. The left IFG is involved in language processing and speech production, while pSTG is
responsible for processing sounds. Other challenges affecting language acquisition include
maintaining phonological information in short-term memory (Speciale et al., 2004) and verbal
working memory capacity (Brooks & Kempe, 2013). The adult is at a disadvantage in these areas
compared with younger FL learners. However, despite the unfavorable physiological conditions,
there are nonetheless adults who achieve a high level in new language learning. Qi et al. (2017)
suggests that the ability to learn necessary language information in FL depends on the neural
signatures of native-language processing; because everyone has a different processing neural
signature, there are a variety of FL learning outcomes. This would explain why some adults
speak a second language well but struggle with reading, while others are competent readers but
are unable to articulate fluently (Bird et al., 1995). In short, research shows that neurological
constraints are one reason for unfavorable language-learning outcomes for adult learners.
However, language teachers should also know that maturation of the brain means better
reasoning and analytical abilities, and therefore, language-learning strategy can play a vital role
in adult language learning.

19
Adult Language-Learning Strategy
Language-learning strategy is a double-edged sword in adult language learning (Jiang,
2007). Some studies have concluded that learning strategy is one of the elements supporting a
positive language-learning outcome (Brooks & Kempe, 2013; Saito, 2017). Ehrman and Oxford
(1990) also suggested in their study that learners with more strategies tend to be able to learn
more effectively and better. Additionally, language is rule-governed (Sokolik, 1990) and adults
are superior to children in generalizing and extracting rules from a language (Inhelder, 1958).
Therefore, this is an advantage for adults learning a new language. However, language learning
strategy also has limitations in adult language acquisition. Jain (1969) explained that when adults
encounter complexities in a FL, they try to find the generalized rules and apply it to all similar
situations, including those that should be exceptions. The generalization strategy therefore leads
to language errors. Jiang (2007) argued that adults’ perceptual salience helps them learn
grammar, but at the same time it also prevents the development of integrating knowledge or
automatic competence, which is critical for achieving native-like language performance. Ehrman
and Oxford (1990) indicated that analytical adults prefer clarity and accuracy and have less
tolerance towards ambiguity, which is one of the reasons behind an unsatisfactory language-
learning outcome. After all, language learning is different from language acquisition (Cui,
2018)—the former is consciously learning, while the latter involves internalizing language
unconsciously. As such, language-learning strategy as an effort made intentionally by learners
might be helpful in language learning, but it has more limited effects regarding language
proficiency than native acquisition. Accordingly, a language-learning strategy can help with
learning but also hinder language learning.
Adults face additional challenges in language learning from physiology, strategy
constraints, and external factors. It is essential for teachers to continue working on the problem

20
of helping adult learners to better understand language learning and reach a high level of
language proficiency to meet the increasing needs for a workforce with foreign-language
proficiency. The role of teachers implementing effective learning strategies is key to achieving
high-level language proficiency as an adult.
Current Teaching Approaches for Achieving High-Level Language Proficiency
Research suggests that the analytical nature of adult learners means that their learning
needs a purpose (Hoggan, 2016). To better assist adult language learners, teachers’ teaching
purposes should be directly aligned with adult learners’ motivation for learning. All curricula,
activities, and assessments should reflect the meaningful purpose of learning to create a
meaningful learning environment. Second, adult learners come to a classroom with prior
knowledge and formed preferences in learning (Suprayogi et al., 2017), and teachers should
address these diversities accordingly. The learning environment should be flexible,
individualized, and dynamic, which is helpful for tailoring learning content or processes to an
adult learner’s individual needs. Third, a self-directed learning environment is more suitable for
adult learners because of their self-awareness. Teachers should play the role of facilitator in the
classroom (Cross, 1981). Giving adult learners more control over their learning not only supports
addressing their individual needs but also cultivates their autonomous learning skills to help
them become lifelong learners (Brockett & Hiemstra, 2018). Some teaching approaches and
methods (e.g., the Grammar-translation method, the Audiolingual method, and the Total Physical
Response) that are prominent before the twentieth century could not satisfy the calling in the
language teaching field (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Therefore, in the twenty-first century,
several major language-teaching approaches and methods became popular to provide these
optimal elements for language learners.

21
One approach is Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which promotes
communicative competence through learner-centered and experience-based teaching techniques
(Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Influenced by the communicative movement in Europe language
teaching, Wilkins (1972) began to propose that the communicative element of language could be
used to set the foundation for language teaching. CLT has been well-received by many education
systems and language teachers (Hinkel, 2011), but it also has critics. For example, Ahmad and
Rao (2012) concluded that CLT is not suitable for some East Asian countries because of local
beliefs about language teaching and learning. Some Chinese schools have adopted certain CLT
techniques but still practice traditional language-teaching approaches (Jin & Cortazzi, 2011).
Even though CLT was introduced to Korea years ago, language teachers there have been
reluctant to adopt it in their daily teaching (Vasilopoulos, 2008), and Chowdhry (2010) observed
a similar phenomenon in Bangladesh.
A second prominent teaching approach is Content-Based Instruction (CBI) or Content
and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). The concept of using foreign languages to teach
content was from European Commission policy to promote multilingualism among member
states (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Lyster (2007) argued that learners can learn language and
content at the same time, enhancing the learning of both. Brinton (2007) described that CBI uses
authentic materials and tasks to ensure that learning is meaningful. On the other hand, Paran
(2013) was skeptical that the effectiveness of CBI is as significant as other studies claimed, and
Richards and Rodgers (2014) raised the concern for CBI that language teachers might end up
teaching content about which they are not experts. CBI was also not successful in Dalton-Puffer
and Smith’s (2007) study, which concluded that school environment and student population
played a more important role in determining the result of teaching methods.

22
A third language-teaching approach is Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) which
focuses on exchanging information in a real-life situation rather than on the language itself
(Richards & Rodgers, 2014). It has a theoretical foundation in Communicative Language
Teaching (Wills & Willis, 2007) and Second Language Acquisition (Van den Branden, Byyate,
& Morris, 2009). After deriving from the communicative language teaching, the TBLT was first
applied in the Malaysian Communicational Syllabus and the Bangalore Project (Richards &
Rodgers, 2014). Additionally, tasks in real life have been found to be especially motivational
(Van Gorp & Bogaert, 2006). Although teachers and students enjoy this approach (Van den
Branden, 2009; Van Gorp & Bogaert, 2006; Wills & Willis, 2007), it requires both extra training
for teachers and orientation for students (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Additionally, it is difficult
to measure the product of TBLT, and therefore this approach is not suitable for a teaching
context where results must be aligned with outside standards (Richards & Burns, 2012).
A fourth popular language-teaching approach is Cooperative Language Learning (CLL)
which emphasizes peer support through paired and group work in learning activities (Olsen &
Kagan, 1992). John Dewey is a US educator who first promoted cooperation in language
teaching in the early twentieth century (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). This method creates a
cooperative learning environment rather than a competitive one (Johnson, 1994), where students
become the source of knowledge and play an active role in language learning (McGroarty, 1989).
However, language teachers must learn interaction skills to facilitate effective cooperation, and
some learners benefit more from this teaching approach than others because of different
proficiency levels (Richards & Rodgers, 2014).
Every teaching approach or method has advantages and disadvantages. However, the four
described above all place students in the center of teaching and class design (Richards &
Rodgers, 2014). Therefore, to place students in the center of teaching is believed to be one of the

23
most important measures. However, Qi et al. (2017) argued that the ability to learn necessary
language information in FL depends on the neural signatures of native-language processing, but
because everyone has a different processing neural signature, there are a variety of FL learning
outcomes even when the same teaching approach or method is applied. As such, research often
focuses on the diversity of students and the use of different approaches or methods to achieve an
optimal result (Ahmad & Rao, 2012; Jin & Cortazzi, 2011; Kumaravadivelu, 2012; Paran, 2013).
CLT, CBL, and TBLT could be helpful for some students, in some teaching contexts; however, it
does not mean it will be beneficial for other students in another teaching context. Therefore,
when students from different FL backgrounds gather in one classroom, especially given the
additional complexities of adult learners, differentiated instruction (DI) is essential (Suprayogi et
al., 2017). This approach focuses on learner diversity and the appropriate techniques to address
it. Knowing about the students and the teaching context is the first step and foundation of
teaching (Dalton-Puffer & Smith, 2007). This study will focus on differentiated instruction to set
a foundation for future studies.
Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Adult Foreign Language Acquisition
Differentiated Instruction (DI) is not a specific technique, but rather an approach that
integrates many strategies and methods (Watts-Taffe et al., 2012). It requires teachers to evaluate
the abilities of individual students and adjust teaching accordingly for each to promote optimal
learning (Roy, Guay, & Valois, 2013). This is also called “adaptive instruction,” “personalized
learning,” “individualized instruction,” “response to intervention,” and “Universal Design of
Learning (UDL)” (Suprayogi & Valcke, 2016). The definitions for these different terms all
revolve around the same ideas. Suprayogi and Valcke defined this as an approach “to cope with
the diversity of students, adopt specific teaching strategies, invoke variety in learning activities,
monitor individual student needs and pursue optimal learning outcome” (2016, p. 2). Baecher et

24
al. (2012) suggested that DI involves focusing on a specific group of students in the class rather
than the whole class and requires teachers to create variations of the main activities tailored to
different needs.
DI is generally characterized as flexible, equitable, and intelligent (Fox & Hoffman,
2011). Tomlinson (1999) describes that in a differentiated classroom, the teacher addresses
students’ differences by using formative assessments to decide the learning sequence, and
modifies the content, process, and products according to each learner’s needs. These adjustments
and modifications are dynamic. Differentiated instruction might appear to be complicated and
time-consuming, but its advantages outweigh any extra analysis and preparation required
(Suprayogi, Valcke, & Godwin, 2017).
The Potential Benefits of Implementing Differentiated Instruction in Adult Foreign
Language Acquisition
Differentiated instruction is not exclusive to other teaching methods but inclusive with
other promising teaching practices (Ricketts, 2014). Every learner is different (Fogarty & Pete,
2011). The diversity of students should be honored, and each student should be provided with
appropriate instructions (Watts-Taffe et al., 2012). DI ensures that teachers plan strategically to
address this variability among students (Tomlinson, 1999). Because students come to the
classroom with different interests, needs, backgrounds, learning styles, motivations, and
capabilities (Suprayogi et al., 2017), if teachers want them to learn best, they need to identify
every student’s “zone of proximal development” (Vygotskij, 1978) and provide challenges to
keep them on-task (Guay et al., 2017). DI helps teachers recognize each student’s strengths and
limitations (Heacox, 2012) and provide suitable challenges and learning conditions to help
students succeed and feel competent (Roy et al., 2013). Appropriate challenges better motivate
students to increase their engagement, interest, and satisfaction, which maximizes their learning

25
potential (Suprayogy et al., 2017). Moreover, DI improves students’ self-confidence and
metacognitive awareness (McQuarrie & McRae, 2010).
Successes in Implementing Differentiated Instruction
Research shows that differentiated instruction could improve adult learners’ academic
performance (Chamberlin & Powers, 2010; Iurea et al., 2011; Rogers, 2009). It has a positive
effect on students in higher education when students are adults (Tulbure, 2012). According to
Rogers’ 2009 study, when a group of future education or higher education students experienced
various teaching techniques throughout their coursework addressing their learning preferences,
this not only encouraged their participation but also enhanced their performance on assessments
(2009). Chamberlin and Powers (2010) also reported the positive effects of DI to address adult
students’ diverse needs in understanding the logic of knowledge, which can apply to any subject
in learning. Iurea et al. (2011) pointed out that even though it is hard for professors to adapt to
students’ needs and preferences, once implemented, students’ academic performance improved
and remained stable. Similarly, Tulbure’s (2013) work concluded that the implementation of
differentiated instruction resulted in higher performance for students. Tulbure (2013) conducted
a study in a higher education environment and found that students who received learning style-
based instruction had significant academic improvement compare to students who received the
whole class type of instruction. As a result, practitioners have begun to research how to conduct
differentiated instruction in a variety of teaching contexts for adult learners. This paper will
focus on the differentiated instruction in adult foreign language teaching.
Differentiated instruction will help foreign language learners improve their language
learning outcomes and learning motivation. Ortega (2018) conducted a study that examined how
a thorough DI training for teachers would affect students’ learning experiences and outcomes.
The result indicated that DI was able to help students to achieve academic excellence. Chen

26
(2006) conducted a quasi-experimental study, which investigated the impact of using
differentiated curriculum and instruction on students’ motivation and interest in learning English.
The results indicated that DI increased EFL learners’ motivation and interest levels. Moreover,
Kelley (2018) conducted a semi-structured interview with nine secondary teachers regarding
their experiences of DI. These teachers also provided artifacts of their DI implementation. The
research results showed that DI built students’ autonomy and improved their perception of their
classes.
Implementation of Differentiated Instruction
According to Moore (2005), teachers can address students’ different needs by
differentiating the learning content, learning process, learning product, and learning
environment. Based on Moore’s work, Tomlinson and Imbeau (2010) further developed the
differentiated instruction model into seven elements. They believed that in addition to content,
process, and product, differences in learning profiles, readiness, affect, and interests are also vital
to consider when conducting differentiated instruction. Fogarty and Pete (2011) suggested that
teachers should first provide choices to learners; second change the content, process, and
product; and third challenge the emotions, attention, and memory of different learners.
Subsequently, Whipple (2012) adjusted the sequence somewhat, arguing that teachers should
start the differentiation in lesson planning, then differentiate the content and process, while
taking students’ interests and assessment into consideration, and finally differentiating the
learning products. Similarly, Smit and Humpert (2012) suggested that before addressing the
content, process, and product, teachers should be aware of differences in attitude. Afterward,
teachers should use different communication, collaboration, and coaching strategies and
continuously apply formative assessment during implementation. Baecher et al. (2012) adopted
the three main domains of content, process, and product but also specified how to help students

27
at different levels in these three domains. Like Smit and Humpert (2012), Roy et al. (2013) also
promoted formative assessment in conducting DI, proposing that DI includes only two key
components: 1) instructional adaptations, which include differentiating content, process, and
product, and 2) academic progress monitoring, which means using formative assessment to offer
guidance for differentiated instruction. In addition to following the above guidance, a number of
conditions are necessary to ensure the successful implementation of DI.
According to Fend (2008), four levels of conditions should be considered: system level,
school level, teacher or class level, and individual student level. At the system level, the support
of government policy and the education system is fundamental to the implementation of
differentiated instruction (Suprayogi & Valcke, 2016). At the school level, leadership support is
vital for conducting DI (Goddard et al., 2010; Roy et al., 2013; Smit & Humpert, 2012), as is
team culture and peer collaboration (Opdenakker & Van Damme, 2007; Smit & Humpert, 2012).
At the teacher and class level, a teacher’s self-efficacy, beliefs about DI, teaching experiences,
certification, and classroom management are all relevant (DeNeve et al., 2015; Wan, 2015;
Suprayogi et al., 2017), with respect to which teacher professional development is the most
essential condition in contributing to the successful implementation of DI (Suprayogi et al.,
2017). At the student level, learners are encouraged to cooperate with the teacher and become
autonomous in their learning (Smit & Humpert, 2012).
With workplaces increasingly calling for a multilingual workforce (Hazel & Svennevig,
2018), and the lack of coordinated and consistent FL development in the US education system
(Mitchell, 2017), the acquisition of FL in adulthood is an important issue to address. Constraints
to FL acquisition as an adult are well documented, as are some strategies, such as differentiated
instruction, that seem to enhance adult FL acquisition. If this problem is not addressed and

28
environments and conditions for adult language acquisition are not created, the nation will fall
behind economically and leave a loophole for national security.
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest a framework to identify and address performance gaps.
According to their framework, to solve a performance problem, it is essential first to determine
the performance gap. The practitioner must first have a clear and specific goal, then use
assessment tools to evaluate the current status or level of achievement. With the goal and current
achievement at hand, the practitioner to identify the gap and analyze its causes. Clark and Estes
(2008) believe that causes can be categorized into three groups: knowledge and skill, motivation,
or organizational factors. The practitioner should determine the root causes of the gap in each of
the three categories, then generate an action plan to address these root causes. After
implementing the action plan, the practitioner must evaluate the results of the implementation,
then adjust the action plan if the goal has not been achieved. Thus, the gap analysis process is a
recurring process rather than a linear procedure. The essential part of the whole process focuses
on the three types of influences on performance: knowledge and skill, motivation, and
organizational factors. There are four types of knowledge and skill: factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002) that will be explored in this study. In addition,
there are three components of motivation: active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Pajares,
2006) that will be examined. The organizational factors that will be explored in the context of
this study include value chains, work processes, and material resources (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
This review of scholarly research focuses on knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences for stakeholders in achieving the goal of demonstrating high quality instruction by
instituting differentiated instruction in their classrooms.

29
Knowledge and Skills Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) found that knowledge and skills are one of three dimensions
essential for achieving goals. In this study, to reach the organizational and stakeholder
performance goals as stated, it is critical for teachers to obtain the necessary knowledge and
skills to achieve the goal of high-quality language instruction, specifically related to
differentiated instruction. According to Krathwohl (2002), there are four types of knowledge and
skills: factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive
knowledge. This paper will focus on the factual knowledge, procedural knowledge and
metacognitive knowledge needed by teachers to address the problem of practice of the West
Coast Language Institute discussed in this paper.
Teachers Need to Know What Differentiated Instruction Entails
Factual knowledge is the basis of all knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). To
know what differentiated instruction entails is a factual knowledge. At the WCFLI, many types
of knowledge and skills are required for the Instructor Certification Course (ICC). In terms of
factual knowledge, teachers need to know what differentiated instruction is, especially regarding
students aiming for higher-level language proficiency (level 2 and above). At the beginning of
the learning process, teachers need to know students’ strengths and weaknesses. As students
progress, they come to the classroom with different interests, needs, backgrounds, learning
styles, motivations, and capabilities (Suprayogi et al., 2017). These essential elements are
translated into intermediate goals (Clark & Estes, 2008), which form the starting point of
curriculum design in the method of backward design (Richards, 2013). These intermediate goals
impact instructional strategies during the learning process and guide the formative and
summative assessments that are tailored to each student’s needs. These goals are used to align
the standards of the final proficiency goal, which is level 2+/2+/2 and beyond.

30
Teachers Need to Know How to Conduct Differentiated Instruction
Procedural knowledge is the “how” - the actual methodology for completing a task (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Teachers must know what differentiated instruction is and its importance, but
also how to actually conduct differentiated instruction. Many models aim to guide teachers in
implementing differentiated instruction and, despite minor differences, all of them are based on
three key elements: content, process, and product (Baecher et al., 2012; Fogarty & Pete, 2011;
Roy et al., 2013; Smit & Humpert, 2012; Suprayogi et al., 2017; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010;
Whipple, 2012). These models suggest that teachers can change the teaching content, adjust the
teaching process, and tailor the production of teaching to students’ needs, interests, backgrounds,
learning styles, motivations, and capabilities (Suprayogi et al., 2017).
Teachers Need to Reflect on Their Teaching
Teachers Need to be Able to Reflect on Their own Teaching and Evaluate When to
Adjust Teaching Methods. Metacognitive knowledge is the awareness of action while
undertaking it, and reflecting on actions after completing them (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011).
The most typical manifestation of metacognition is a reflection (Ghaye, 2010; Moon, 2000;
Rodgers, 2002; Schön, 1983). In education, no matter in general or a specific teaching context,
teachers should regularly reflect on their instruction to students and adjust it accordingly. For a
teacher, such reflection is not only on the knowledge taught but also on the instructional methods
used. Reflecting on both the good and bad of the teaching experience makes these experiences
more meaningful (Rodgers, 2002). Schön (1983), Rodgers (2002), and Moon (2000) have all
suggested a series of steps for reflection. They emphasized a complete and thorough process: the
experience itself, identifying and understanding the experience, analyzing the experience,
generating a possible solution to improve the experience, and then experimenting. Ghaye (2010)
and Rodgers (2002) also encouraged reflection in a group with others. Ghaye (2010) argued that

31
an appreciative intention towards knowing, relating, acting, and organizing is the best practice to
reach alignment, a system that he called Participatory and Appreciative Action and Reflection
(PAAR) (2010). Rodgers (2002) believed that a critical reflection criterion is reflecting within a
community, which not only gives self-confidence but also allows one to see things from a
different perspective and gain support from others. In an educational context, teachers should
often reflect on their teaching content and methods to keep abreast with changes in students’
learning processes.
Reflection is very important for achieving goals. According to Fortwengel and Jackson
(2016), apprenticeship is a process that happens to everyone, including teachers. Teachers
(perhaps subconsciously) apply what they think is best in their classroom (Collins et al., 1989). If
they take a moment to reflect on students’ reactions and performance, teachers will realize that
each group of students has different preferences and so prefer different teaching methods and
materials. If teachers do not adjust their instruction and curriculum accordingly, it will inhibit
them from achieving their goals. Once the teacher realizes the importance of reflection, the next
step is knowing what to reflect on and how. According to Schön’s research, people need to
reflect not only after an action but also before and during (1983). Reflecting before the action
helps activate all background information and set goals for the action. With this, the action is
purposeful. Reflecting during the action involves making sure to correct mistakes along the way
before potentially going too far off track. Overall, then, reflection is a critical element in the
metacognitive dimension, and worth the effort and energy for adult foreign language teachers to
implement.
Table 2 describes the WCFLI’s organizational mission, the organizational performance
goal, the teacher stakeholder goal, the assumed knowledge influence and type, and how the
assumed influence is assessed.

32
Table 2. Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Influence, knowledge types, and knowledge assessment
Organizational Mission
The West Coast Language Institute’s mission is to offer the best and most efficient foreign
language education to its students.
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of fiscal year 2023, all students from the Basic course will attain the expected ILR
level of 2+/2+/2 .
Stakeholder Goal
By the end of October 2022, all teachers will demonstrate high quality differentiated
instruction skills through teacher training provided by the organization.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Teachers need to know what
differentiated instruction entails.
Declarative
(factual)
Interview Question: What does
differentiated instruction mean to you?
Teachers need to know how to
conduct differentiated instruction.
Procedural Interview Question:
1. Throughout your teaching
experience, how have you
overcome the challenges of the
diversity of students’ language
learning?
2. Can you tell me step by step how
do you use DI in your instruction?

33

Motivation Influences
Knowledge is not the only element that determines success in achieving a goal—
motivation is also critical (Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) argue that motivation should be
examined in three aspects: choice, persistence, and mental effort. Choice is when one decides to
start an action, persistence means whether or not one will continue the action started; and mental
effort is how much desire one has to keep conducting the action.
Many elements affect motivation, including value, self-efficacy, interest, attribution, goal
orientation, and emotion. Eccles (2006) found that value is the first critical aspect of achieving a
goal. It influences people’s choice. If people value an objective or activity, they are more
motivated to choose to start doing it. In Eccles’s (2006) study, there are four types of value.
Intrinsic value refers to one’s inner feeling regarding something. Attainment value is one’s
perception towards it from his or her upbringing. Utility value is the practical benefit of doing
something. Cost value is how much time, energy, or money is needed to accomplish the task.
Pajares (2006) described the second element of motivation: self-efficacy, which is one’s belief of
the ability to achieve a goal. High or low self-efficacy will affect performance (Pajares, 2006).
Self-efficacy is related to the choice, persistence and mental effort aspects of motivation. The
third element influencing motivation is interest. According to Schraw (2009), there are two types
of interest: situational interest and personal interest. Situational interest motivates people to
decide to start a task, while personal interest motivates people to continue doing the task, which
is related to the persistence aspect of motivation.
Teachers need to be able to reflect
on teaching and evaluate when to
adjust their teaching methods.
Metacognitive Interview Question: In general, how do
you know that your teaching is
effective?

34
The fourth element of motivation is attribution, which includes people’s beliefs regarding
the causes of things. Since it is highly correlated with the choice and mental effort aspects of
motivation, Anderman and Anderman (2006) concluded that attribution is a significant factor
that directly or indirectly affects one’s motivation. The fifth element is goal orientation. Goal
orientation theory explains why students work on a task (Fraser, 2015). Goals fall into two
groups: mastery and performance (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). A mastery goal means that
students are motivated because they want to be good at specific skills or tasks, while a
performance goal means that students put in an effort at specific tasks to demonstrate their
superiority in these areas over others (Hibbert et al., 2018).
Further, the mastery and performance goals can be further divided into the approach and
avoidance goals (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). Therefore, the four possible combinations are
mastery-approach oriented, mastery-avoidance oriented, performance-approach oriented, and
performance-avoidance oriented. Finally, emotion is also related to motivation. According to
Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2014), emotion has two factors relevant to motivation: valence
and activation. Valence has two possible dimensions: positive or negative, while activation also
has two dimensions: activating or deactivating. There are four combination of these dimensions:
positive activating, for example: joy, hope; positive deactivating, for example: relief, relaxation;
negative activating, for example: anger, shame; negative deactivating, for example: boredom.
These combinations are either achievement emotions (positive activating & positive
deactivating) or epistemic emotions (negative activating & negative deactivating). Achievement
emotions have a positive effect on motivation, while epistemic emotions do the opposite. In the
following section, two of these elements are discussed in the context of WCFLI: attribution and
self-efficacy.

35
Teachers Need to Believe in Differentiated Instruction
Teachers need to believe if they apply differentiated instruction, they can achieve the
educational goal for adult advanced-language acquisition. The notion of attribution is based
primarily on Weiner’s (1991) model that both the environment and personal perspectives affect
motivation. Moreover, the characteristics of the attribution are more critical than the attribution
itself. In this model, attribution has three dimensions: locus, stability, and controllability. The
locus dimension can be further divided into internal and external because the cause of an event
can be internal or external. The stability dimension determines whether the cause is stable or
unstable. Controllability refers to whether people have control over the cause. How one
perceives the cause of an event can significantly affect motivation in doing the task (Anderman
& Anderman, 2006). For example, if people think the cause of the event is external, stable, and
uncontrollable, they might feel that the outcome is not determined by their own ability,
knowledge, skill, or effort. This reduces motivation for the task. However, if the course of an
event is perceived as internal, unstable, and controllable, participants are more likely to put in
more effort or find ways to improve their relative ability. It is evident that perceptions of the
cause will not always be correct; however, the actual characteristics of the attribution are not
essential as long as the effect is motivational.
The same approach applies to teachers at the West Coast Language Institute: they should
believe that student performance is internal, unstable, and controllable. First, student
performance results partially from the effort of teachers. Therefore, a teacher’s pedagogical
method matters. Because different students have different needs, differentiated instruction
ensures that all student needs are addressed. Second, the result of student performance is
unstable, which also means that the goal of achieving higher proficiency for adult learners is not
impossible. Differentiated instruction is an effective approach for increasing student achievement

36
(Tulbure, 2011). Third, student performance is controlled partially by the teacher, which means
that teaching methods affect student performance. With this kind of mindset, teachers are more
likely to find the motivation to work on their abilities and effort.
However, if teachers conclude instead that the causes of student performance are external
(like the school, or the students themselves), or result from uncontrollable elements (such as
limited time to work with students), then teachers are less likely to reflect on their teaching
methods or effort. Improvement is unlikely in such cases, and future performance can therefore
also be affected. That is why attribution is one of the essential elements affecting motivation.
Self-efficacy also plays a critical role in achieving goals.
Teachers’ Self-Efficacy
Teachers need to believe that they can effectively implement differentiated instruction.
The self-efficacy of teachers influences not only their own performance but also that of students
(Holzberger et al., 2013; Holzberger et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2017; Zee & Koomen, 2016).
Teacher self-efficacy has a positive influence on teachers’ innovation of teaching methods (Zee
& Koomen, 2016), on the attitude of teachers towards obstacles encountered during teaching
(Holzberger et al., 2013), on classroom-management skills (Holzberger et al., 2014), and on
teachers’ relationships with colleagues and students (Miller et al., 2017). All of these affect
student performance (Miller et al., 2017). Teachers with higher self-efficacy will also do better in
motivating students and, therefore, bring about higher achievement (Holzberger et al., 2013).
Additionally, research has shown that students have more respect for teachers who demonstrate
higher self-efficacy, and they believe that these teachers are more competent than others.
Students then have higher self-efficacy regarding their own learning outcomes (Miller et al.,
2017). Teacher self-efficacy, therefore, both directly and indirectly affects student achievement.

37
In the teaching context of the West Coast Language Institute, language teachers should
demonstrate self-efficacy so that they can attain knowledge and skills regarding differentiated
instruction through professional development training. Moreover, they should demonstrate high
self-efficacy regarding their ability to implement differentiated instruction in their classroom
despite the challenges of differentiated instruction, including that is it can be more complex and
time-consuming and requires experience and extensive teaching knowledge and skills
(Suprayogy et al., 2017).
Table 3 describes the WCFLI’s organizational mission, its organizational performance
goal, the teacher stakeholder goal, the assumed motivation influence and type, and how the
assumed influence is assessed.
Table 3. Motivation Influences
Motivation influence, motivation types, and motivation assessment
Organizational Mission
The West Coast Language Institute’s mission is to offer the best and most efficient foreign
language education to its students.
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of fiscal year 2023, all students from the Basic course will attain the expected
ILR level of 2+/2+/2.
Stakeholder Goal
By the end of October 2022, all teachers will demonstrate high quality differentiated
instruction skills through teacher training provided by the organization.
Motivational Indicator(s)
Motivation Influences Motivation Type Motivational Influence Assessment

38

Organizational Influences
This study focuses on organizational culture influences toward teachers achieving the
goal of having all students who complete the Basic course attain the expected ILR level of
2+/2+/2 in listening / reading / speaking, respectively.
Organizational culture influences are the main elements in organizational influences.
Organizational culture has been defined in many different ways (Cameron & Quinn, 2006;
Denison & Mishra, 1995; Engelen et al., 2014), with two frameworks identified here. One is
Selfridge and Sokolik’s iceberg model (1975), named after an analogy to emphasize that the
visible portion of culture is like the iceberg above the water—it is only a small portion of the
whole. The visible part manifests as action/behavior and structure, while the invisible part is the
core values of the culture. A second cultural framework is the competing value framework
(CVF) (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983). The CVF has four dimensions: internal and external from a
Teachers need to believe if they
apply differentiated instruction,
they can achieve the educational
goal for adult advanced-
language acquisition.
Attribution Interview Question: To what
extent do you think applying
differentiated instruction in your
teaching approaches would impact
students learning to achieve higher
proficiency?
Teachers need to believe that
they can effectively implement
differentiated instruction.
Self-efficacy Interview Question: To what
extent do you feel
comfortable/confident conducting
differentiated instruction to meet
this diversity in needs?

39
transaction cost perspective, and the opposite extremes of organic/flexibility and
mechanical/stability from a system-structural standpoint. Within the CVF, Schmiedel et al.
(2013) believe that four central values are beneath each dimension of the framework. These four
values are customer orientation, excellence, responsibility, and teamwork. The underlying value
for organic/flexibility is excellence, responsibility is mechanistic/stability, collaboration is an
internal focus, and customer orientation is an external focus.
Some additional organizational cultural models have been developed based on the CVF
framework. For example, Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) suggest that there are four types of
organizational cultures: clan, adhocracy, hierarchical, and market culture. Schneider (1995)
asserts that there is a control culture, collaboration culture, cultivation culture, and competence
culture. Cameron and Quinn’s (2006) culture types are similar to Schneider’s—they argue that
the framework should consist of creating culture, compete for culture, collaborate culture, and
control culture. Denison and Mishra (1995) believe that the CVF divides culture into four
dimensions that emphasize different utilities of organizational culture. These four dimensions
offer four critical aspects of effective organizational culture: adaptability, mission, involvement,
and consistency.
Further, organizational culture can be distinguished by cultural models and cultural
settings. According to Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001), the cultural model describes shared
value and norms, which are invisible. The cultural settings are visible behavior, environment,
and procedures. The cultural model determines the cultural settings, and those settings are
merely the manifestations of the model. However, Goldenberg and Sullivan (1994) argue that by
implementing four elements to adjust cultural settings, it is possible to influence and therefore
change the cultural model. This study will address fostering a learning community as a cultural
model and providing resources and establishing accountability system as cultural settings.

40
Foster a Culture of Supportive Community
The organization needs to foster a culture of a supportive community. In an educational
organization, the supportive community not only refers to an organizational culture that supports
students’ learning but also enhances the professional growth of teachers (Carpenter, 2015).
Organizational support significantly increases the success rate of new programs (Berends
et al., 2002; Durlak & DuPre, 2008; Kam et al., 2003). Four elements are suggested to create a
supportive culture for meaningful professional development (Goldenberg & Sullivan, 1994).
These four elements are shared goals, assistance, leadership support, and success measurement
indicators. In the WCFLI, the shared goal for teachers’ professional development is to build a
learning community. Then, the teachers need to acquire assistance and leadership support for
teamwork. In quantitative research about the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies
(PATHS) curriculum’s implementation, Kam et al. (2003) examined the relationship between
support from the principal of the school and implementation quality. The results from 164
interviewed students demonstrated that a higher degree of program support from the principal led
to better implementation quality. To ensure that language teachers at the WCFLI improve their
performance, several things need to happen: teachers must share the belief that building a
learning community is essential for professional development, the teachers must improve
teamwork, and the administration and leadership need to provide necessary resources (funding,
time, and rewards) to empower teachers. Moreover, organizational support is vital for WCFLI to
generate and maintain meaningful professional development.
Provide Necessary Resources
The organization needs to provide the necessary resources to conduct meaningful
professional development. Teachers’ professional development or teacher training should be as
important as students’ education (Nicolaidis & Mattheoudakis, 2008). Training gives teachers

41
the necessary knowledge and skills to accomplish the mission and adapt to developments and
changes in the teaching context. Through training, teachers are involved in the education field
and consistently maintain and improve their professionalism.
Meaningful professional development is crucial (Çelik, 2016). Herold (1977) asserts that
gaps exist in the training of FL teachers. One gap is that the language proficiency level of
language teachers is often below what is appropriate for teaching a language (Friedman, 2015). If
there are not enough qualified teachers, students will not achieve satisfactory results. And, if
students do not produce satisfactory results, fewer people will be qualified to be language
teachers in the future. At WCFLI, when language teachers are hired, the organization values
candidates’ target language proficiency over their professional level in language teaching.
Therefore, almost all the language teachers in the institute are native speakers of the target
languages. Some teachers in the WCFLI, especially teachers of the less taught languages, likely
need to bridge the gap of insufficient teacher professional development, which is often identified
as another gap that exists in the training of FL teachers (Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011). This
contributes to a possible unsatisfactory result of FL education. A root cause of these gaps is that
little attention is paid to creating a system for training and certifying master teachers, or to
improve the design and function of the teacher training system (Lambert, 1992).
Organizational influences on performance are important for achieving the organizational
goal. Given this, it is important to understand the key elements of organizational influences that
create a supportive culture for reaching the goal. Table 4 describes the WCFLI’s organizational
mission, its organizational performance goal, the teacher stakeholder goal, the assumed
organization influence, and how that assumed influence is assessed.
Table 4. Organization Influences
Organization influences and influence assessment

42
Organizational Mission
The West Coast Foreign Language Institute’s mission is to offer the best and most efficient
foreign language education to its students.
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of fiscal year 2023, all students from the Basic course will attain the expected ILR
level of 2+/2+/2.
Stakeholder Goal
By the end of October 2022, all teachers will demonstrate high quality differentiated
instruction skills through teacher training provided by the organization.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence:
The organization needs to foster a culture of
supportive community.
Interview Questions:
1. What obstacles have you encountered
when you were trying to practice DI that
is out of your control?
Cultural Setting Influence:
The organization needs to provide the
necessary resources to conduct meaningful
professional development related to
differentiated instruction.
Interview Questions:
1. What resources, if any, would you want
the organization to provide to apply DI
effectively?
2. Which, if any, of these resources are now
offered by the organization?

43
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation with
the Organizational Context
The literature review above presented a number of variables that are assumed to
contribute to the success of achieving the stakeholder and organizational performance goals. The
goal of the organization is that by the end of fiscal year 2023, all students from the Basic course
will attain the expected ILR level of 2+/2+/2. There are three principal stakeholders involved in
achieving this organizational goal: students, teachers, and the administration. The focused
stakeholder in this research is the language teachers.
The organization is a language training institute that teaches adult learners proficiency in
a FL within an allotted time. The organization therefore needs both to support students to
achieve various proficiency levels and support teachers by offering meaningful professional
development (Friedman, 2015; Herold, 1977; Pufahl & Rhodes, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008)
assert that organizational support is indispensable for reaching a goal. The leadership can focus
on building a cultural setting with a healthy and constructive cultural model to support language
teachers in achieving the organizational goal (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Tohidi & Jabbari,
2012).
The literature also suggests that language teachers should be aware of instructional
techniques to best support the diversity of adult language learners, including the importance of
differentiated instruction. Differentiated instruction can help students achieve the highest level
of proficiency (Alavinia & Sadeghi, 2013; Chamberlin & Powers, 2010; Connor, 2011; Guay et
al., 2017; Roy et al., 2013). As such, it is essential to know how to conduct differentiated
instruction skillfully (Guay et al., 2017; Roy et al., 2013; Watts-Taffe, et al., 2012).
Connected to obtaining these critical pieces of knowledge, teachers must also believe that
they are capable of obtaining them (Kilday et al., 2016; Miller et al., 2017; Schiefele &

44
Schaffner, 2015; Vancouver & Purl, 2017). Further, teachers need to believe that once they put
in the effort to learn and implement them, they will achieve their goal (Anderman & Anderman,
2006; Weiner, 1991).
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Guiding This Study

As the figure shows, the organizational goal is that by the end of the fiscal year 2023, all
students from the Basic course will attain the expected ILR level of 2+/2+/2. The research
questions guide this study into reaching this goal. The first research question discusses the

45
necessary knowledge and motivation needed for teachers to achieve the goal. According to Gai
(2014) and Connor (2011), for students to reach a certain level, differentiated instruction is
beneficial. WCFLI teachers’ understanding of differentiated instruction and how to conduct
differentiated instruction is fundamental to achieving the organizational performance goal. In the
process of teachers pursuing this knowledge, they also need to believe that differentiated
instruction is vital to the success of students, they have the ability to provide this type of
instruction, and their effort of conducting differentiated instruction will lead to success. A
teacher may attribute failure to students’ lack of effort or aptitude and assume that this student
will fail no matter what the teacher does. If this is the case, the teachers’ motivation to provide
differentiated instruction will lessen.
Interrelated organizational factors are also crucial to achieving the goal. The goal is set to
serve the organization; thus, it is easy to see that the organization directs the focus of knowledge
and motivation needed to achieve the goal. However, once the focused knowledge and
motivation are identified, a specific organizational culture is also necessary to support
knowledge and motivation. In the context of the WCFLI, the organizational culture model
requires the organization to foster a culture of a learning community. In addition, the cultural
setting must support the idea that necessary resources are provided for meaningful professional
development. Moreover, to make sure teachers’ professional development is effective, an
accountability system for assessing the professionalism is essential. Once the organization has
this cultural environment, it will be easier for teachers to obtain the knowledge and motivation
they need.
The influencers interact with and influence each other in different ways, and improving
only one element does not guarantee an optimal outcome. It is essential to keep a balance,
adjust, and improve all elements together to bring about the desired result.

46
Conclusion
The purpose of this research study is to understand the elements that are essential for
language teachers in order to help adult language learners to achieve a higher FL proficiency
level. In this chapter, a review of the related literature was conducted to provide insight into
factors that affect adult language learners in achieving a high proficiency level including: the
history and current status quo of FL teaching in the United States, difficulties for adult language
learners, and teacher-related elements influencing successful adult acquisition of a foreign
language. The literature review concluded with a focus on the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis conceptual framework and the stakeholder group of language teachers, and how
increasing their knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational supports would enable adult
language learners to improve their likelihood of achieving high proficiency. Chapter Three
discusses the research methodology used to better understand and assess such factors.

47
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This study addresses the problem of language teachers’ needs in helping adult foreign
language learners reach high proficiency levels through differentiated instruction. There is an
increasing need for a workforce with foreign-language proficiency for commerce, national
security, and other areas, and challenges involved with attaining a high level of language
proficiency when learning a new language as an adult. Therefore, teaching approaches adopted
by language teachers play an important role (Kessler & Hubbard, 2017). This chapter presents
the research design and methods for data collection and analysis. The research questions that
guide this study are as follows:
1. What knowledge is required for teachers to facilitate students’ attainment of a higher
level of language proficiency through differentiated instruction?
2. What motivation is required of teachers to facilitate students’ attainment of a higher level
of language proficiency?
3. What is the connection between organizational culture and teachers’ knowledge of
differentiated instruction and motivation?
4. What are the recommended solutions for the issues raised here in the areas of knowledge
of differentiated instruction, motivation, and organizational culture?
This chapter first describes the stakeholder population of focus, and the criteria this study
used for their selection. Even though this study is focused on one group of stakeholder-teachers.
However, in order to have a holistic understanding of the teaching context, this study will also
interview the leadership stakeholder for reference. Then, the chapter discusses the data collection
method and the data analysis method. Afterward, this chapter touches upon the topics of
credibility and trustworthiness of this study and the ethics this study obeyed. Last, the limitations
of this study will be discussed.

48
Participating Stakeholders
The three stakeholder groups detailed in this study included leaders, teachers and
students, all of whom play important roles in achieving the organization’s goal for students to
reach higher levels of language proficiency. Although a complete analysis would involve all
stakeholder groups, for practical purposes this study focused on the stakeholder group of teachers
and how their performance contributes to achieving the organization’s global goal. Additionally,
this study interviewed three organizational leaders in order to gather information about the
teachers’ teaching context from the perspectives of the leadership. Teachers are the critical
element, and a group over which the organization has the ability to set policies to support the
global goal. In order to achieve the 2+/2+/2 proficiency goal, the organization must conduct a
series of adjustments to the current system of operation. Teachers, as one of the main stakeholder
groups, will be involved in this process of organizational change. The role of teachers in the
organization is to provide an efficient curriculum, to adopt effective teaching methods, to employ
valid and reliable assessment tools, and to give constructive feedback (Demirbolat, 2006). These
require a well-qualified teaching group. Consistent professional training will better equip
teachers in their classrooms (Salgür, 2014). As such, the stakeholder goal for teachers is that by
the end of October 2022, all teachers will demonstrate high quality differentiated instruction
skills. It is crucial for teachers to reach this goal in order to better serve the organizational goal,
as teachers play an essential role in this process of organizational change.
Although the leader group is not the focus of the study, they nonetheless offer a valuable
perspective on what organizational leadership perceives that teachers require in terms of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational support to effectively implement differentiated
instruction. This background information helps to complete the picture.

49
Stakeholder’s Role in Organizational Change
According to Lewis (2011), an organization’s stakeholders can play four roles: opinion
leader, connector, counselor, and journalist, and one group of stakeholders might play more than
one role. At the West Coast Language Institute (WCLI), the teachers act primarily as counselors.
Teachers are not only students’ emotional support, but also their informational support (Lewis,
2011). The organizational goal for students to reach proficiency levels 2+/2+/2 can put students
under considerable pressure and stress. They need high self-efficacy and motivation. This
motivation is supported and nurtured by teachers, with whom the students interact daily. Even
though the organization’s goal is more closely related to students, teachers provide important
information, instruction, and support to students to help them achieve the goal. When the
organizational goal changes, the teachers’ instructional methods and the information provided to
students needs to change accordingly. Therefore, the teachers’ role in the process of
organizational change is critical as they serve as counselor to students.
Unlike the teachers, the stakeholder group of leaders in the organization plays all four
roles. They are opinion leaders—they set a goal for the organization, and make critical decisions
to achieve the goal. They are also connectors. In a large organization like WCFLI,
communication and mutual understanding are virtual. Connectors are there to bridge
communication and operational gaps. Further, leaders are also counselors—they provide social
and emotional support to teachers and students when needed. And finally, leaders are journalists.
When new programs and projects are implemented, they investigate and report on the
effectiveness and influence. However, although leaders play essential roles in the organization,
this study focuses on the stakeholder group of teachers. As such, the leaders were interviewed
regarding only their opinions about teachers’ needs in implementing differentiated instruction.

50
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The data collection approach for this study was interview-based. The participants
consisted of teachers and leaders. Teachers are those who had taught Intermediate and Advanced
courses for at least three years and had at least one student achieve ILR level 2+/2+/2 in every
class they taught in that period. Leaders are those who played a role as an opinion leader,
connector, counselor, or journalist. The interviews focused on collecting information from
language teachers and leaders in the languages taught in the organization: Chinese, Arabic, Dari,
French, Hebrew, Indonesian, Korean, Pashto, Persian Farsi, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, and
Urdu.
Criterion One
Teachers have taught at the Intermediate or Advanced level for at least three years in the
WCFLI. The teachers being interviewed should have experience in teaching at a higher level to
help this study answer the above research questions. Some of the language courses are 64 weeks
long. Teachers need to go through two courses to have a good understanding of their teaching
context and an in-depth reflection on their teaching experiences in this teaching context.
Therefore, it was preferable that teachers recruited had taught more than three years in the
WCFLI.
Criterion Two
Teachers have at least one student who had achieved ILR level 2+/2+/2 in each class
taught over the past three years. Some experienced teachers who are good at teaching to high
levels of student achievement work in the Basic program, and so this study should include
teachers who had taught students to the ILR level 2+/2+/2 before. To avoid the possibility that
this is simply the result of particular students who are very talented or have previous experience
in the language, teachers who were interviewed had a history of at least one student in every

51
class taught for the past three years achieving this level. The specific three-year span was
because three years ago students were tested by another assessment system. The present system
had run organization-wide for the past three years.
Sampling Strategy and Timeline
This study applied purposeful and quota-sampling strategies. In the education field,
teachers typically need five to ten years of experience to improve student performance by 9.5%
(Bouguen, 2016). The interview sampling strategy for teachers was purposeful to elicit essential
information for this study; interview participants had successful experience with teaching adult
learners who had achieved high proficiency levels, defined as level 2+ or above. Additionally,
this study was designed to address generalized elements that teachers need to help adult language
learners achieving higher proficiency. Therefore, the study included the variable of different
languages to look across languages for generalizable elements needed by teachers to help adult
language learning. In order to achieve this, interview participants were language teachers from
different language departments who teach different languages: Chinese, Arabic, Dari, French,
Hebrew, Indonesian, Korean, Pashto, Persian Farsi, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, and Urdu. The
interview questions focused on world languages teachers generally rather than specific language
teachers. The interview sampling strategy for leaders was also purposeful. The leaders
interviewed had meaningful experience either in teacher training or in higher-level language
teaching.
This study adopted a quota strategy. Many language teachers have successful experiences
teaching adult learners to achieve higher proficiency. And some of them had taught at the
Intermediate or Advanced level for at least three years in the WCFLI. This study interviewed
twelve of them. A majority of leaders in the organization also fit the interview criteria, but the
study specifically targeted leaders with higher positions in the chain of command. The data-

52
collection process was scheduled to start in November 2019 and finish in January 2020. Then,
the researcher analyzed field notes and recording transcripts.
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
This study aimed to reveal teacher knowledge, motivation, and organizational culture
needed to contribute to the success of adult language learners in achieving a higher proficiency
level in FL through differentiated instruction. The first and second research questions focused on
knowledge and motivational elements, and in-depth interviews were efficient for uncovering the
answers to these “what” questions (Johnson & Christensen, 2017). Existing research suggested
that there are relations between organizational culture or context and stakeholder knowledge and
motivation (Durlak & DuPre, 2008), and the third research question aimed to identify these
connections specifically at the West Coast Foreign Language Institute. An interview gave
participants more freedom and flexibility to express their perspectives without restricting their
answers, with specific questions generated based on the literature review and previous research
(Patton, 2002). The fourth research question looked for innovative solutions that are applicable
in the teaching context of WCFLI. An interview offered better data-collection methods to elicit a
depth of understanding of teacher knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs and current
gaps before generating solutions that holistically addressed these needs in the specific
organization.
The sampling criteria discussed above led to at least 54 language teachers who had
successful experiences teaching adult learners to achieve high proficiency and had taught at the
Intermediate or Advanced level for at least three years in the WCFLI. The researcher sent out
emails to all 54 language teachers and gave them a timeline to express their willingness for
participation. Some teachers agreed, some refused, and some refused but recommended other
teachers for the interview. If more than one teacher of the same language responded, the teacher

53
who responded first was interviewed. The researcher also sent out invitation emails to six
leaders, interviewing three in higher positions within the organization. This study is not
indicating their specific positions as a privacy measure.
Interviews
Interview Protocol
This study used a semi-structured interview. A list of guided questions ensured that the
interview was effective in addressing the factors described in the conceptual framework
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2017). Additionally, a semi-structured interview gave the interviewer and
interviewees enough room to explore vital elements in depth. The conceptual framework adopted
in this study was Clark and Estes’s Gap Analysis Model (2008). This framework guided the
study to analyze the problem from three perspectives: knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors. The interview questions were primarily what and how, and include open-ended questions
as well as yes-or-no questions. The yes-or-no questions served primarily as transitions to lead
participants into a topic or to change topics (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
Interview Procedures
The interview began with lead-in questions that activated participants’ schemata and
brought them into the topic. Then, the interview addressed the knowledge and motivation aspects
jointly. Conceptual knowledge questions were left to the latter part of the interview for two
reasons. First, the interviewer wanted to verify the generalized findings from the literature
review and previous research. Second, when the participants’ answers aligned with previous
research findings, it indicated that the generalized findings also applied at WCFLI regardless of
the unique nature of the organization. When the participants’ answers did not align with previous
findings, the interviewer attempted to uncover more deeply which specific elements in the
organization may have led to this discrepancy of perspectives.

54
However, if the interview had begun with conceptual knowledge, participants might have
been led in one direction, which could have countered the advantages of the interview. The
interview would have then been less able to elicit innovative and varied perspectives. After
obtaining the information needed for knowledge and motivation, the interviewer adjusted the
organizational questions according to the previous responses. For example, the interviewer dug
deeper when participants’ answers did not align with previous findings.
The interviewer met each of the 12 participants for an interview session of about one
hour. The interviews were conducted in English, and, upon approval of the interviewee, the
details captured by both notes and audio recordings.
Data Analysis
Upon permission, the interviews were recorded. Data analysis began immediately
following data collection. The researcher wrote analytic memos after each interview. The
researcher documented thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data in relation to
the conceptual framework and research questions. Once the researcher had left the field,
interviews were transcribed and coded. In the first phase of analysis, the researcher used open
coding, looked for empirical codes and applied a priori codes from the conceptual framework. A
second phase of analysis was conducted where empirical and prior codes were aggregated into
analytic/axial codes. In the third phase of data analysis, the researcher identified pattern codes
and themes that emerged in relation to the conceptual framework and study questions.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

Many critics raise concern about the credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative
research (Shenton, 2004). Therefore, as Maxwell (2013) suggests, it is essential to identify any
threats to credibility and trustworthiness before applying any strategies.

55
One threat to the credibility and trustworthiness of this study was that there was only one
data-collection method—the research utilized only an interview. To guard against this potential
weakness, the researcher applied peer scrutiny and external audit strategies before beginning data
collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2017). The two Institutional Review Boards (USC and WCFLI)
reviewed the interview protocol and the research design, which were adjusted according to the
feedback. After data collection was complete, the researcher engaged in member checks to
ensure the data and interpretation were accurately portrayed (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher
sent the interview transcription to participants who wanted to receive their recordings. Only three
participants wrote back and corrected some of the transcription. The researcher both took notes
and recorded the interviews, and these records were analyzed by the researcher and through peer
scrutiny following the researcher’s analysis of the data.
Another threat to credibility and trustworthiness is any possible researcher bias that
influences participants during the interview process. The interview questions were reviewed
through external audit, which helped ensure that they did not lead participants or shape their
opinions, increasing the dependability of the research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2017). Moreover, a
member-checking strategy was adopted after the data collecting process. Then, peer scrutiny was
utilized to eliminate bias during the data-analysis process and ensure that findings and
conclusions truly represented participants’ opinions (Patton, 2002). Another strategy adopted
was to document the procedures for checking and rechecking the data throughout the study. This
strategy increased the confirmability of the research (Shenton, 2004).
Ethics
To ensure the protection of involved human participants in this study, the researcher
strictly followed ethical codes. First, the researcher ensured the confidentiality of the
information collected during the interview (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). The interview recording and

56
notes taken during the interview were kept in a password protected file folder. Another challenge
in doing interviews is that as participants develop trust with the researcher, they might reveal
information that is not related to the research but nonetheless puts the researcher in an ethical
dilemma (Glesne, 2011). For example, some teachers may know about the test content after
teaching for so many years. Or, some students may have developed a good relationship with their
teachers and shared test information with their teachers. In order to avoid this, the researcher
included a statement in the informed consent document that if any information obtained
indicated illegal activities, the researcher would report the information to authorities. Therefore,
these situations did not happen during this study.
Second, the researcher did not harm the participants. The IRB department in the
researched organization invited interviews through a group email that stated the identity of the
researcher, the purpose of the research, the risks a participant might encounter because of this
research, what each participant would be asked to do, approximately how long the interview
would take, and a participant’s right to withdraw without punishment at any time during the
process, as well as affirmed that participation was entirely voluntary (Merriam & Tisdell, 2017).
Anyone who was willing to take part in the interview replied to the invitation email. The
researcher then distributed the consent form and scheduled interviews with participants. Third,
the researcher valued the principle of reciprocity. The researcher stated the benefits of this
research at the beginning of the interview.
The researcher is a member of the researched organization, which is a foreign-language
training institute. The purpose of this research was aligned with the goal of the organization. As
such, the research results might be utilized by the organization after the study was complete.
Several potential points of misunderstanding might occur during the research. For example,
because the researcher is a teacher trainer in the organization, participants might think that the

57
research was a component of the teacher-training programs provided by the organization, and so
feel obligated to participate. The invitation email explicitly addressed the purpose and nature of
the research and the role of the researcher as a doctoral student at USC to avoid this confusion.
Moreover, the researcher was highly involved in research projects with similar topics at the
researched organization. The research results for this study were not used in any work-related
project until the study was completed.
Further, biases may occur because the researcher is a member of the researched
organization and because of the researcher’s own work experiences in the field. Additionally, the
value and belief system of the organization might influence the perspectives of the researcher
regarding the research topic. Interview questions might therefore unintentionally direct
participants towards the researcher’s beliefs. To prevent this, the researcher had the interview
questions reviewed by objective professionals who are experts in the research field but not
members of the organization (Merriam & Tisdell, 2017).
Limitations
This study could be improved by larger sample sizes within the organization to include
all demographic and cultural variables and learning preferences, which would better represent
the focused stakeholder group. Teachers’ teaching style is affected by their demographic
variables, learning preferences as well as cultural elements (Mohanna et al., 2016). The
participants for the interviews were from different cultural and demographic backgrounds with
different learning preferences. Therefore, the findings might greatly relate to these variables
other than solo academic influencers. Another limitation of this study was that the interviewees
were not native English speakers. Conducting the interview in English could have hindered the
participants’ full capacity of expressing their thoughts and opinions. During this study during
member checks, three transcriptions were received back from the participants with corrections

58
mainly on mis-transcribed words and phrases. The final limitation of this study was that even
though the literature review discussed a number of variables that contribute to the success of
achieving the goal of adult foreign language proficiency, only a few are highlighted in the
conceptual framework. This choice was based on the holistic consideration of the research
questions.

59
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to addresses the problem of a lack of adult foreign-
language learners achieving higher language proficiency and the needs of teachers to improve
their performance through differentiated instruction (DI). The study specifically focused on the
needs of foreign-language teachers at the West Coast Foreign Language Institute (WCFLI) and
on feedback from institutional leaders to improve the outcome of foreign-language programs
through differentiated instruction. The questions that guided this study are the following:
1. What knowledge is required for teachers to facilitate student attainment of a higher level
of language proficiency through differentiated instruction?
2. What motivation is required for teachers to facilitate student attainment of a higher level
of language proficiency?
3. What is the connection between organizational culture and the teachers’ professional
motivation and knowledge of differentiated instruction?
4. What are the recommended solutions for the issues raised in the areas of knowledge of
differentiated instruction, motivation, and organizational culture?
As discussed in Chapter Three, the methodology for this study was a qualitative design.
This study adopted a constructivist worldview by seeking to explore and understand teachers
involved in foreign-language instruction who had successful experiences in reaching the most
recent organizational goals related to adult language acquisition. Interviews were conducted to
explore each teacher’s perspective on differentiated instruction and understand their teaching
experience within the institutional culture and context. These interviews identified continuing
needs and current assets as well as potential solutions to the problems involved in achieving
organizational goals consistently at WCFLI.

60
This chapter begins by describing the stakeholders. It then presents the results and
findings of the study, including an analysis of the interview data regarding knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs and assets. The chapter concludes by organizing the
interview data along emerging themes.
Participating Stakeholders
The participating stakeholders for this study were twelve teachers at WCFLI who had
successful experience in reaching the most recent organizational goals, as well as three leaders of
the language school. Table 5 includes the description of the participating stakeholders. The
results presented do not identify the language each participant teaches or the years of language
teaching experience in order to protect the participants’ privacy. The languages the participants
teach are Arabic, Chinese, Dari, English, French, Hebrew, Indonesian, Korean, Pashto, Persian
Farsi, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Urdu (in alphabetical order). The years of language teaching
experience range from 6 years to 21 years.
Table 5
Description of Participating Stakeholders
Participant Stakeholder Gender Language
Teaching/ Native
Language
FLT 1 Foreign-Language
Teacher (FLT)
Male Arabic, Chinese,
Dari, English,
French, Hebrew,
Indonesian, Korean,
Pashto, Persian
Farsi, Russian,
Spanish, Tagalog,
Urdu (in
alphabetical order)
FLT 2 FLT Female
FLT 3 FLT Male
FLT 4 FLT Female
FLT 5 FLT Male
FLT 6 FLT Female
FLT 7 FLT Male
FLT 8 FLT Female
FLT 9 FLT Female
FLT 10 FLT Female
FLT 11 FLT Male
FLT 12 FLT Male

61
FLSL 1 Foreign-Language
School Leader
(FLSL)
Male
FLSL 2 FLSL Female
FLSL 3 FLSL Male

Determining Continuing Needs and Current Assets
The assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs to reach the stakeholder
goal of demonstrate high quality differentiated instruction skills and subsequently the
organizational goal of 2+/2+/2 were identified from a literature review and researcher knowledge
and were confirmed to be continuing needs or current assets based on the interview data. The
assumed needs were identified as continuing needs when half or more of the foreign-language
teachers (six or more of the twelve) provided evidence of lacking the knowledge, motivation, or
organizational support to successfully implement differentiated instruction. The assumed needs
were identified as current assets when half or more of the foreign-language teachers already
demonstrated the knowledge, motivation, or organizational support necessary to successfully
implement DI. The analysis of assumed needs also included input from the school leaders to
identify additional continuing needs and current assets in determining how DI can be
implemented effectively by teachers to help students achieve the new organizational goal.
Findings of Assumed Knowledge Needs
Table 6 summarizes the assumed knowledge needs for teachers to help adult foreign
language learners achieve a high proficiency level. Three assumed knowledge needs and one
newly identified knowledge need are discussed here: teachers must know what differentiated
instruction entails, teachers must know how to conduct differentiated instruction, teachers must
be able to reflect on teaching and evaluate when to adjust their methods, and teachers must know
how to connect research to practice. Of these, the need to know what differentiated instruction
entails and to reflect and evaluate were not validated as a gap. Almost all teachers were able to

62
define differentiated instruction to an extent, and more than half reflected and adjusted their
teaching regularly. Therefore, this study does not emphasize these two requirements. However,
the assumed need that teachers must know how to conduct differentiated instruction was
validated as a gap, and a newly identified need that teachers must know how to connect research
to practice emerged. According to the findings, even successful and experienced teachers were
unable to systematically and holistically articulate how to apply DI. Additionally, the interview
data show that language teachers struggle with applying what they know about differentiated
instruction into effective practice. The organization’s training has introduced how to apply
differentiated instruction systematically, however, in the real-life classroom, teachers encounter
different situations which are not covered in the training. Therefore, teachers do not know how to
proceed further with their DI. These two continuing knowledge needs widely influence
institutional goals and have significant impact on achieving organizational goals. Therefore,
these two needs are prioritized in the recommendations presented in Chapter 5. Table 6
summarizes these findings, and the following sections discuss these knowledge findings in
greater detail.
Table 6
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Needs
Assumed Knowledge Need Continuing
Need
Current Asset Newly
identified
Need
Teachers must know what differentiated
instruction entails.
X
Teachers must know how to conduct
differentiated instruction.
X
Teachers must be able to reflect on
teaching and evaluate when to adjust their
methods.
X
Teachers must know how to connect
research to practice.
X

63
Teachers Must Know What Differentiated Instruction Entails
Differentiated instruction is also called “adaptive instruction,” “personalized learning,”
“individualized instruction,” “response to intervention,” and “Universal Design for Learning”
(UDL) (Suprayogi & Valcke, 2016). The qualitative interview data collected demonstrates that
language teachers do have a clear understanding of differentiated instruction. Foreign language
teacher FLT defined it as “giving them different material or different activities to engage them
cognitively during the process or producing something different.” Moreover, FLT 11 articulated
what DI is not: “You don't lower the level to a point when it does not create learning. This is
what differentiated instruction does not mean. Differentiate instruction is not to provide
convenient or comfortable learning, but it’s adjusting the level of struggle.” When asked what
differentiated instruction means to them beyond simply the definition of DI, most language
teachers expressed the necessity of differentiation and its benefit. Some teachers indicated that
DI gives students a sense of achievement. Others described that DI provides support and makes
students feel that teachers care about them, and DI, therefore, motivates students. Seven out of
the twelve language teachers agreed that every student is different and learns differently, so
learning is more efficient when the instruction is differentiated. FLT 11 described this in detail:
We have different students, we have no control over our input. And those students have
different personalities, different learning styles, right? And some of them can work well
with others. Some prefer to work alone, some listen well, some don’t. Some need to be
challenges. Some don't like to be challenged too much.
Moreover, as students advance to a higher level, their learning needs change, as FLT 4 noted:
“[Challenges] in higher level teaching is the big gap between the student’s proficiency levels.”
Eight teachers mentioned DI when asked what they think are the most effective teaching
methods for helping students achieve a higher proficiency level. FLT 1 replied, “Using different

64
methodology, teaching methodology. I believe differentiated instruction that could be one of the
tools that can pave the way for the students to reach to a higher level.” FLT 9 shared her success
with DI: “My approach typically is to focus on how to incorporate their personal interests and
how to differentiate that instruction.” Overall, the interviewed teachers demonstrated a strong
knowledge of what differentiated instruction is and its benefits. Teachers know what
differentiated instruction entails is therefore a current asset at WCFLI.
Teachers Must Know How to Conduct Differentiated Instruction
According to Moore (2005), teachers can address students’ different needs by
differentiating the learning content, learning process, learning product, and learning
environment. At WCFLI, language teachers know how to identify students’ interests,
personalities, learning styles, proficiency levels, and needs. However, teachers lack systematic
knowledge of how to provide effective differentiated instruction in different situations.
When asked to articulate step-by-step how they conduct differentiated instruction, seven
of the twelve language teachers emphasized the importance of identifying students’ interests,
personalities, learning styles, proficiency, and needs before differentiating instruction. FLT 3
described, “A good teacher must observe his students. He should know what they are, not only
learning style, I would say another element here: what level they are. So then I build them.” FLT
10 responded similarly, “I mean in the classroom or even outside of the classroom you constantly
need to diagnose students’ learning habits and their proficiency level and everything.” Overall,
language teachers at WCFLI demonstrate strong knowledge in how to identify differences
among students.
However, teacher responses regarding how to apply this information were incomplete and
inconsistent. Five teachers mentioned adjusting the teaching content. FLT 1 said, “I will prepare
material based on their learning style. Maybe you can have a reading [passage] so you can have

65
some video where that person, who’s an auditory person [to listen to it].” Some teachers
differentiate based on students’ proficiency levels. FLT 9 noted that “if their level is different
especially big differences, there’s no point to use the same material because the lower one will
never get anywhere, only have frustration.” A different set of five teachers mentioned modifying
teaching processes, like assigning different classroom activities and conducting one-on-one
sessions. FLT 7 offered a specific example:
Within a class of six, we might have three different things happening and that’s
absolutely fine as long as they get to the goal in their own way. Say we are introducing
grammar. I know the group that already got it so they can go ahead and create something
with it. Well, I can work closely with the group that needs more explanations and support
and exercises. In this way I support everybody.
FLT 8 noted, “Differentiation occurs really like outside of the class, like mentoring. We’re going
to go over their homework, maybe one-on-one.” Another set of five teachers mentioned altering
teaching products to suit students’ needs – for example, requiring different homework or
assignments. FLT 7 described this:
We will have to modify for each group whatever we do including homework
assignments…. Well, that was our homework usually consists of a grammar exercise,
some reading, some listening. Further in the course if it needs to be, we tweak the reading
and listening based on the needs of students. Actually, that's going to be the differentiated
thing. If I have a student who needs more listening practice, I give them more listening
and take away the reading.
FLT 9 concurred: “For those students [extroverts] they can do a report. And the quieter students
can write journal. So I can review check so they don't feel they're being exposed.”

66
All of these strategies are constructive and practical. However, according to Heacox
(2012), to use DI strategies systematically and comprehensively involves considerations of
content, process, and product will achieve the best differentiation outcome. Only three out of
twelve teachers systematically addressed the complete content, process and product phases of
differentiation, while the rest struggled when implementing DI in specific contexts. FLT 7 said,
“This is actually the biggest challenge working here because you will have students with
different needs and you don’t know how to really cater to them individually all the time.” As a
result, even language teachers in WCFLI familiar with identifying students’ interests,
personalities, learning styles, proficiency levels, and needs potentially lack the knowledge to
effectively and systematically implement differentiated instruction in different learning
situations. Thus, how to conduct differentiated instruction is a continuing need.
Teachers Must Be Able to Reflect on Teaching and Evaluate When to Adjust Their
Methods
Roy et al. (2013) suggested that teachers must evaluate the abilities of individual students
and adjust teaching accordingly for each in order to promote optimal learning. At WCFLI,
language teachers regularly reflect on their teaching based on formative assessments of students
and on student feedback. When asked how they know that their teaching is effective, all twelve
interviewed language teachers indicated that they reflected on their teaching after class. Seven
reflect on teaching based on student feedback, and eleven reflect based on formative assessments
they conducted for students. FLT 5 described, “It is the feedback of the students. One day, of
course, every single teaching hour, you cannot do that but overall, I usually read the End of
Semester Questionnaire (ESQ) of students if they have any good or bad feedback.” FLT 6
similarly said, “You take feedback from the students. Was it good? Was it productive? Was it
useful? Do you guys think we can add anything to make it more?” Sometimes, without asking

67
students directly, language teachers also collect information about their teaching through
formative assessments. FLT 3 described the process and usefulness of this:
Here I will say again, the new term I will use, “formative assessment.” Every day you are
going through that process. You are doing formative assessment. You are assessing your
student, the direction they are going. So it helps not only students’ learning, it helps
teachers as well to modify or to adjust his activities or teaching approach. Not only
activity but teaching approach, I will say. Formative assessment help me to differentiate
also what approach I’m going to take next.
FLT 9 also mentioned, “I believe in dynamic assessment. On a daily basis, each class I'm
teaching, I'm also assessing. Formative assessment. It’s a constant, disguise form, so they don't
realize that. Then I have a sense of their proficiency and my teaching.” The foreign language
teachers demonstrated strong metacognitive skills, which makes this a current asset at WCFLI.
Teachers Must Know How to Connect Research to Practice
Bartell et al. (2018) concluded that experienced language teachers have specific needs
from in-service training programs and are not looking only for general teaching theories. At
WCFLI, considerable training has been provided in differentiated instruction. As FLT 2 noted,
“There's a lot of training that goes into providing teachers with differentiated instruction.”
However, they are all about general theories. As mentioned in Chapter One, the organization has
various and complex teaching contexts. Therefore, the organizational level of training cannot
adapt and address all of them. The result is that teachers still experience difficulty in applying
these ideas in their own teaching contexts after trainings.
When asked what obstacles they had encountered when implementing differentiated
instruction, six of twelve teachers noted that it is difficult to integrate differentiated instruction
learned in the workshops into the curriculum and transfer the theory to the classroom.

68
Differentiated instruction is an approach that could mix and match different teaching methods
and strategies (Baecher et al., 2012). To know the theory and its principles doesn’t mean teachers
can apply these freely in their teaching context. FLT 1 said, “If I have a rigid curriculum, it’s
gonna be, it’s gonna tie my hand on it, I won't be able to do it [DI].” In DI training, teachers
should practice on change the teaching content based on students’ needs (Chamberlin & Powers,
2010). Conversely, some teachers know how to adapt what they have learned into the reality of
their classroom. FLT 3 described the curriculum as simply an underlying resource: “Curriculum I
say always is a guideline. It’s not 100 percent you just keep.” In general, however, language
teachers expressed that even though they have gone through training and have knowledge about
differentiated instruction, it is challenging to transfer differentiated instruction theories in their
own teaching contexts. FLT 11 said, “Attending a training, it’s very different from relearning it
through practice. It will be good to receive feedbacks and have a discussion with your co-
teachers. And we just don't have the time and the capacity to do that.” FLT 2 noted similarly, “So
I think maybe not necessarily more training is needed, but support to help teachers transfer that
training to the classroom.” DI training provided by the organization must address a general
teaching context, but each school has its own micro teaching context that is not covered by
institutional training.
Even though language teachers learn what they need to know about differentiated
instruction, they nonetheless struggle to translate the theory into practice. Language teachers
need to realize that the reality will never look the same as the training scenarios; therefore,
training facilitators need to help participants transform the theory and adapt the theory to their
teaching context (Buhmann et al., 2018). Connecting research to practice is therefore a newly
identified need.

69
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Knowledge Needs
The interview data from language-school leaders at WCFLI further informed these
assumed knowledge needs and the newly identified knowledge need. First, the institutional
leaders indicated that they believe differentiated instruction is one of the most promising
teaching approaches. FLSL 2 said, “I’m not going to mention any specific approaches or
methods because I believe that it’s a combination frequently and it depends on the student’s
needs.” FLSL 3 also concluded that “tailored instruction is the key to students’ success.” FLSL 1
described the merits of DI in detail:
Differentiated instruction for me aims to remedy a situation where students are of
different learning abilities, different learning styles, different proficiency levels, and… a
teacher takes these factors into account when he or she designs a lesson. The tasks are
differentiated. Content could be differentiated, they could be on the same topic, but the
materials given to the students are different. It could be the same materials but that tests
are different.
FLSL 2 described DI as “tailoring instruction to each learners’ needs to reach learning objectives
at the same time.” FLSL 3 defined it as “attending to the learning needs of a particular student or
a small group of students rather than the typical pattern of teaching the class as though
everybody in the class were basically the same.” Overall, every interviewed school leader
emphasized the importance of DI. FLSL 1 said, “I don’t think with the current mission, the
current goal of 2+/2+/2, we will be able to reach the goal if teachers don’t have a basic
understanding of differentiated instruction.”
In regard to how to conduct differentiated instruction, leaders agreed with the language
teachers that the first step is identifying students’ academic needs. FLSL 1 pointed out that “you
start with knowing your students. The teacher has to have a solid knowledge of where the

70
students are in terms of language learning, their abilities, and their learning strategies.” FLSL 2
also noted that teachers “should know who to differentiate it to. They should know each
student’s level of linguistic proficiency, their interests, so they can tailor to that. They should
know student’s background.” The school leaders demonstrated a more comprehensive
knowledge about how to conduct differentiated instruction, and all of them described in detail
how to conduct differentiated instruction by adjusting content, process, and product. For
example, FLSL 3 said:
It could be process, products, materials, you can see a student is really having trouble
with listening. So you are diagnosing what the issues are and then you’re giving them
specific materials, specific strategies to kind of work on it on their own. And then you’re
checking up on them and supporting them, pushing them to the next step.
However, school leaders also acknowledged the challenges in implementing DI. All of them
noted providing modeling or sharing sessions to help teachers exchange experiences and
overcome some of the challenges. FLSL 2 suggested “sharing success stories. At the department
level, at the school level. Teach demo lessons of how she or he is doing it so that others see that
it’s not just a theoretical concept, but it’s applicable.”
Further, the language-school leaders agreed that the teachers are reflecting, as there are a
variety of tools to provide teachers with feedback about their teaching. School leaders said that
students’ feedback and teachers’ formative assessments are two of the best tools to utilize in
reflecting on teaching. FLSL 1 said, “You [teachers] are meeting students. Talking about
different types of practices that are going on in the classrooms and what helped them, what
didn’t. Anonymous feedback and you collect that and you try things in different ways.” FLSL 2
said, “In the ideal world I would like our teachers to go back and evaluate whether it [teaching]

71
was effective or not and re-evaluate if needed.” FLSL 3 described the value of the formative
assessment:
The whole purpose of formative assessment is to reflect on their [teachers’] teaching,
reflect on students learning for particular activities, using different types of materials,
how they’re doing it. And then being able to make changes, so a good teacher always
making changes they can say, this didn’t work very well, and they’re kind of analyzing.
The school leaders and language teachers thus use the same assessment tools to assess teaching
effectiveness.
The school leaders also validated the need to connect research with practice. A variety of
training for this is provided by WCFLI. FLSL 3 described, “We do provide a lot of workshops
and training. There’s a lot of emphasis in this school on differentiated instruction.” However,
language teachers are nonetheless struggling to apply the content of this training in the
classroom. FLSL 2 noted the need for practical, application-based knowledge:
In addition to how in theoretical part they should have some maybe practical examples on
how to do that. So they should know not just content, process, product, but if it’s within
content, what can they do with content, how they can do that. If it is process, how they
can group students how they can make sure that it’s sufficient, what are the options
within that and same thing for the product because just saying, well we can do this. Well
how, and that would be the first one.
In order to ensure language teachers apply what they learn in the workshops and training to their
classrooms, differentiated instruction is one of the criteria for institutional teacher certification.
FLSL 3 mentioned, “It’s incorporating all of our certification courses and observing how they’re
able to implement that.”
Overall, language-school leaders believe that differentiated instruction is an essential

72
element in helping students to attain a higher language-proficiency level. However, the teachers
also noted challenges in implementing DI. The first step to overcoming such challenges is for
teachers to identify students’ needs. After connecting research to practice, teachers should then
regularly reflect on their teaching.
Summary Results and Findings for Knowledge Needs
Regarding the assumed knowledge needs for teachers to help adult foreign-language
learners to achieve high proficiency through differentiated instruction, the interview data depicts
two current knowledge assets, one continuing need, and one newly identified need. Throughout
the interviews, it was clear that both the foreign-language teachers and the school leaders
understand what differentiated instruction entails. All twelve teachers were able to define
differentiated instruction and detail its importance. Even school leaders with limited teaching
experience were familiar with differentiated instruction and noted its importance for helping
students achieve a higher proficiency level. Because the interview data conclusively indicate
that both teachers and leaders are familiar with differentiated instruction, it is considered as a
current asset.
Another current asset is the ability of teachers to reflect on teaching and evaluate when to
adjust methods. Throughout the interviews, all teachers indicated that they regularly reflect on
their teaching, using various methods. The most common approaches were through student
feedback and formative assessments. After collecting data via these two methods, language
teachers reflect on their teaching and adjust materials, activities, assignments, or teaching
methods accordingly to suit student needs. All leaders confirmed this practice among teachers
and showed trust and confidence that the teachers were undertaking appropriate reflection.
In regard to the current need for additional knowledge about conducting differentiated
instruction and to the newly identified need to connect research with practice, language teachers

73
at WCFLI first need systematic training in DI. Then, teachers must receive additional help from
their institution or department to implement DI in their specific teaching context. The data show
that different teachers have implemented a variety of DI strategies, but none of them could
systematically articulate the effective application of differentiated instruction in a full range of
circumstances. Leaders were better equipped with this information, but also acknowledged the
challenges for teachers in implementing these techniques. They therefore suggested that the
institution or department should conduct mentor sessions, modeling sessions, or sharing sessions
for exchanging success stories and experiences.
Overall, teachers demonstrated a strong knowledge of the theory of differentiated
instruction and how to reflect on their teaching and adjust methods accordingly, but they lack the
ability to apply what is learned in training to a full range of teaching contexts.
Findings of Assumed Motivational Needs
Table 7 is a summary of the assumed motivational influences on goal achievement. Two
assumed motivational needs for teachers to help adult foreign-language learners in achieving a
high proficiency are discussed in this study: teachers must believe that if they apply
differentiated instruction, they can achieve the educational goal for adult advanced language
acquisition, and teachers must believe that they can effectively implement differentiated
instruction. In addition, a newly identified motivation need, teachers need to believe that their
colleagues can effectively implement DI, became apparent through the interviews.
The first assumed motivational need was validated as a gap. All twelve of the teachers
interviewed indicated that differentiated instruction positively influences student learning when it
is conducted correctly, and seven indicated that DI negatively impacts student learning when
conducted incorrectly. Teachers’ feeling towards DI is complicated. All of them think it is an
excellent teaching practice that benefits students. However, the difficulties of conducting DI

74
make them hesitate when applying DI because many of them believe that if DI is conducted
incorrectly, students will be affected negatively. Therefore, their belief of DI will always bring
positive results is not consistent. The second assumed motivational need was identified as a
current asset. All teachers believed that they demonstrated individual self-efficacy in
implementing DI effectively. However, most indicated a lack of collective self-efficacy in
implementing DI. A new identified motivational influence is therefore that teachers must believe
their colleagues can work with them to implement DI effectively. These validated motivational
needs widely influence the organizational goals and are prioritized to be addressed with
recommendations for practice in Chapter 5. Table 7 summarizes the findings of the assumed
motivational needs.
Table 7
Summary of Assumed Motivational Needs
Assumed Motivational Need Continuing
Need
Current Asset Newly
identified
Need
Teachers believe that if they apply
differentiated instruction, students can
achieve the educational goal for adult
advanced language acquisition.
X
Teachers believe that they can effectively
implement differentiated instruction.
X
Teachers believe that their colleagues can
effectively implement DI.
X

Teachers Must Believe that Differentiated Instruction Can Help Students Achieve the
Educational Goal
Anderman and Anderman (2006) concluded that attribution is a significant factor directly
or indirectly affecting motivation. At WCFLI, foreign-language teachers believe that
differentiated instruction has a positive impact on learning outcomes, and the majority of

75
students also appreciate tailored instruction. However, the innovation of teachers in curriculum
design has been suppressed by graduation obligations—they were unwilling to take the risk of
being innovative with their textbook and lesson planning because they did not have sufficient
faith in DI to produce achievement results.
When asked to what extent teachers think applying differentiated instruction impacts
student proficiency, all interviewed teachers indicated that DI will have a positive impact on
learning. Foreign-language teacher (FLT) 5 was very positive about the effects of DI:
I think very much it will impact the student learning outcome, and it will make the
student learning environment as very productive and very conducive and more fun and
interactive. I think it is a very good tool if it has been widely incorporated in the DLI. We
might have a significant impact on a student's learning results. So I think it is a very
effective tool.
FLT 9 similarly emphasized the importance of DI:
I think that it is very important that students need to build it. They are getting attention,
and then teachers really care about them. And I think that's why I think it impacts a lot.
And also, the tailoring are the instruction lessons based on the students’ level or in the
background and everything, and I think it help them improve their language learning, not
just the language learning also everything else.
Other teachers offered similar responses.
Students also show appreciation for a differentiated approach to teaching. When asked
about students’ reactions to and feedback about DI, FLT 6 indicated, “They appreciated that they
were doing something different. At first, they were very confused about it. Later, they figured it
out, and they liked that we put a lot of mileage on our feet.” FLT 7 commented,

76
The weaker students were really grateful for it. They are grateful to have the chance or
that their teachers took that little extra time to truly look at their needs. They know
teachers understood where they were coming from or what they were good at and what
they needed to work with.
FLT 10 similarly noted that students were pleased about DI because it gave them a sense of
achievement.
Although DI is accepted as a beneficial tool for students aiming to achieve a higher
proficiency level, many teachers still hesitate to be flexible with the curriculum assigned to them
and to be innovative in their teaching plans around DI. Students must take regular achievement
tests, and teachers are not confident that DI will lead to test results as good as those from a
textbook and traditional teaching. FLT 2 said, “We need to see every wrinkle in the page because
that wrinkle might be on the unit test. And there's consequences if they don't do well.” FLT 5
commented similarly:
The system is you need to learn this unit in its particular words and it is a very specific
structure. So you can pass the test. The extra stuff is going to be very beneficial for them,
but you don't have time for it. And it is not going to lead them to do well in the test. And
all they care about is a test because without the test, their GPA is going to drop down, and
consequently they're going to think you're not doing your job.
As such, even when teachers believe in DI’s contribution to students reaching a high proficiency
level, and even when students appreciate DI, teachers nonetheless hesitate to adopt it in their
teaching context.
Teachers Must Believe that They Can Effectively Implement Differentiated Instruction
Pajares (2006) argued that high or low self-efficacy will affect performance. At WCFLI,
most interviewed language teachers believe that they are capable of applying differentiated

77
instruction effectively by themselves. When asked to what extent they feel confident conducting
differentiated instruction to meet students’ diversity in needs, eleven out of twelve interviewed
teachers claimed that they are confident with DI. Some are very confident, like FLT 8: “I think
for me it is very confident because we have been doing this… Diagnostic assessment is all about
assessing students’ different needs and differentiating instructions.” FLT 2 described the
capabilities that come with proficiency in DI:
I could differentiate running down the hallway towards the class just on the go, because I
know who my learners are. I know what paper I have or what material I have and the
creativity or the flexibility to differentiate even on the spot is there. I think it’s a learned
skill to become comfortable with it or fluid.
FLT 11 stated straightforwardly, “After 13 years I feel very confident.”
Some teachers are more conservative, like FLT 7: “I am confident with it if I’ve got the
time to think.” Nonetheless, the current teaching staff clearly consider individual self-efficacy
motivation to be a current asset. On the one hand, teachers’ self-efficacy sets the necessary
motivational foundation for DI implementation. On the other hand, the overestimation of one’s
ability could lead to incorrect application or resistance for future training. The organization
should keep this in mind when approaching teachers with DI related training.
Teachers Must Believe that Their Colleagues Can Effectively Implement DI
Locke and Johnston (2016) concluded that collective self-efficacy is essential to
performance, potentially even more important than individual self-efficacy. Most interviewed
teachers believed that many teachers do not know how to conduct DI effectively, which has a
negative impact on learning outcomes. Moreover, other teachers’ inappropriate implementation
of DI upsets students and changes students’ perspectives on DI. This lowers the confidence of
teachers in implementing DI.

78
When asked if they think every teacher can conduct differentiated instruction, ten of
twelve teachers indicated that they do not think their colleagues are equipped for conducting
differentiated instruction effectively. FLT 3 said, “Others don't know how to do it, I know.” FLT
7 explained in more detail:
I don’t think that all teachers have internalized it…. I would say that not every teacher
knows in that sense how to differentiate. I think 99% of teachers would be able to take
two video lessons and go, “Oh yeah, that's differentiation.” That's just because they hear
the word differentiate and they know what that means, but not because they put it into
practice.
Similarly, FLT 12 said, “We are all human. Not all good at DI.”
Overall, seven of twelve interviewed teachers asserted that student learning outcomes
would be negatively affected if DI is not conducted incorrectly. FLT 2 concluded that “it all
depends on how skilled the teacher is in differentiating.” FLT 3 offered, “If a teacher cannot
identify or differentiate or identify his students, what level they are, and what are their interests,
what their learning styles are, I don't think it works.”
Further, if DI is not conducted correctly, it can affect students’ motivation. For example,
FLT 7 said, “I mean it could overstress them…. If you are casual with your words for example,
and you say, okay, well the weak students are going to do this and that could absolutely
negatively impact.” FLT 9 also commented that if students are sensitive and teachers are very
obvious about the differentiation, the students will feel bad. Both unskillful and insensitive
teachers could make students uncomfortable when implementing DI, which in turn makes
teachers uncomfortable. Eight of twelve teachers noted that even if they are confident about their
own DI knowledge and skills, students’ reactions would significantly impact their confidence in
implementing DI. FLT 4 said, “I feel comfortable to the extent that students don’t feel that they

79
are being treated differently in a bad way.” FLT 6 similarly commented that “from a
psychological point of view, if it [DI] is happening every day, it puts a burden on the weakest
student because their self-esteem goes down. It is a very delicate balance to walk.”
Therefore, even though teachers might have individual self-efficacy, they do not have
enough collective self-efficacy to implement DI fully in their teaching context. Collective self-
efficacy is especially important given that WCFLI is promoting and implementing team
teaching. Moreover, the majority of teachers interviewed indicated that conducting DI
incorrectly leads to a negative learning outcome and negative feedback from students, which
further impacts confidence in implementing DI.
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Motivational Needs
The interview data from the school leaders included several examples that validate the
literature review findings and affirm the motivational needs expressed by language teachers at
WCFLI. For example, school leaders believe that teachers think differentiated instruction
positively influences learning outcomes. FLSL 1 said:
My observation is that almost all teachers wrote it in their lesson plans and annual
appraisals. It tells me that teachers believe in it. At least they think they should believe in
it. However, we do not know how much they acted on it.
While FLSL 1 is not sure about the actual implementation of DI, FLSL 3 said that:
“When I looked at the ISQs and ESQs, students mentioned that. They normally do not leave
comments. But some did. Those teachers must believe in it. But not in all feedback. Only some
of them.” Leaders’ comments are aligned with the findings from teachers’ interview data.
Teachers believe that DI is a practice that will benefit students; however, only some of them
implement it.

80
Regarding language teachers’ individual self-efficacy in implementing DI effectively, the
school leaders were very conservative. As mentioned above, FLSL 1 said that all teachers
reported that they applied DI in their teaching and claimed credit for it. Therefore, FLSL 1
responded: “They must think they are capable of it.” FLSL 2 mentioned that: “They never say
they can’t do it. Of course, they won’t say it in front of me. They have to show me that they are
confident about their abilities.”
As for leaders’ impressions regarding teachers’ collective self-efficacy towards their
colleagues. FLSL 2 said that:
New teachers will look up to the senior teachers. So they should believe in them.
However, it might not be the case the other way around. But we promote teamwork here.
Seniors are willing to mentor new teachers. They (new teachers) have to build their
credentials. One day they will be mentors.
Without saying it directly, this leader suggested that senior teachers may not have
collective self-efficacy towards their colleagues who are new to the organization. The teachers
who were interviewed in this study are senior experienced teachers, which explained why most
interview data showed low collective self-efficacy towards their colleagues. The other two
leaders were very optimistic. FLSL 2 said: “They should have faith in each other; it takes a team
to be successful.” FLSL 3 emphasized: “I think so. We have many successful teamwork stories.”
Overall, school leaders’ impression about teachers’ individual and collective self-efficacy mostly
align with interview findings with teachers.
Summary Results and Findings for Motivational Needs
In regards to assumed motivational needs for helping students to achieve higher
proficiency levels at WCFLI, the interview data suggests strong teacher motivation in one area
and two areas of continuing need. When asked to what extent they feel confident conducting

81
differentiated instruction to meet students’ diversity in needs, eleven out of twelve teachers
described that they are confident. The confidence demonstrates a high-level of individual self-
efficacy. However, teachers hesitated to implement DI regularly for two reasons. First, teachers
are held accountable for students’ test scores, but they do not believe that DI will be as efficient
as a textbook for producing optimal test results. All twelve teachers indicated that DI would
positively impact learning outcomes, but also that textbook and traditional teaching is more
efficient in producing the target test results within the limited allotted time. The teachers were
not willing to risk worse test scores (and therefore worse evaluation as teachers) to apply DI,
despite the belief that it might produce better results. Second, the teachers interviewed indicated
a belief in very low collective self-efficacy to conduct DI effectively. The interview data shows
that the majority of the teachers interviewed did not think that their colleagues were as
knowledgeable or skillful as they should be. Team teaching is the norm at WCFLI, and the
interviewed teachers were therefore concerned that if their partners were not skillful enough in
conducting DI it would negatively impact student performance and motivation. Lack of
collective self-efficacy suggests the need to improve language teachers’ collective self-efficacy
to bring long-term benefits and will be addressed in Chapter Five.
Findings of Assumed Organizational Needs
Table 8 is a summary of the assumed organizational influences on performance. Three
assumed organizational needs for teachers to help adult foreign language learners achieve a high
proficiency level were initially studied: fostering a community culture of teamwork (among
teachers and departments), empowering first-line teachers, and providing the necessary resources
to conduct differentiated instruction. Both needs were validated as current gaps. Further, data
analysis suggests that there is an additional organizational need to reach WCFLI’s performance
goals: establishing an effective accountability system.

82
For the first assumed organizational need, the data analysis showed two elements with
implications for organizational performance. The first is improving teamwork – half of the
interviewed teachers believe that the teamwork between departments needs improvement.
Moreover, teachers also indicated that the teamwork within their own department would benefit
from improvement. Three interviewed teachers noted that they would prefer working alone to
working in a team, even if that means they must work more. The second assumed organizational
need is empowering teachers. Seven of twelve teachers called for more flexibility and decision-
making ability. They complained about micromanagement and that supervisors impose personal
academic beliefs on teachers and prevent them from performing effectively. In terms of the
second assumed need, every teacher interviewed indicated the need for some additional
resources that are currently unavailable in the organization. The lack of these resources has
added difficulties to daily teaching duties. Additionally, seven out of twelve teachers were not
satisfied with the current accountability system. They were demotivated by how their
performance is evaluated and rewards are granted. These three organizational needs influence
organizational goal achievement. These needs are prioritized in the recommendations presented
in Chapter 5. Table 8 summarizes the findings of the assumed organizational needs.
Table 8
Summary of Assumed Organizational Needs
Assumed Organizational Need Continuing Need Current Asset Newly
identified Need
The organization must foster a culture of
teamwork (among teachers and
departments).
X
The organization must foster a culture of
empowering first-line teachers.
X
The organization must provide the
necessary resources to conduct
differentiated instruction.
X

83
The organization must have an effective
accountability system.
X

The Organization Must Foster a Culture of Teamwork
According to Agarwal and Adjirackor (2016), teamwork directly affects organizational
productivity. At WCFLI, the interviewed language teachers indicated the belief that teamwork
among teachers and departments needs to improve. When asked what obstacles beyond their
control they had encountered when trying to practice DI, six of twelve teachers brought up
teamwork. Some mentioned teamwork among teachers, others mentioned teamwork among
departments, and some mentioned both. WCFLI promotes team teaching, but this teamwork
concept is perceived by teachers as cooperation rather than collaboration. According to Kozar
(2010), collaboration requires extensive communication and profound understanding of
teammates’ abilities and duties, and how it contributes to the mission. Therefore, collaboration
entails strategically adapting and adjusting their roles to maximize the efficiency of their actions
while accomplishing the mission together. Some teaching teams at WCFLI divide teaching
duties. One takes over the first half of the time, and the other takes the rest. Their actions might
offset each other’s efforts. FLT 7 described, “Another obstacle is just like on a team having
teachers that kind of resist differentiated instruction. And if they're going to just keep doing what
they're going to do, your differentiated instruction will have good impact, but it's sort of being
diluted.” FLT 6 noted that “teamwork is super important here with everything you do. If one
team member is not on board, it all falls apart so teamwork are super important.”
Similarly, teamwork between departments was described as a gap in implementing
differentiated instruction effectively. In discussing support from other departments, FLT 10
noted,

84
They can contribute more, right now the (students’) profile they give us is declining….
We haven't received one for our current class yet, and it is already midterm. Yeah, we
know our students very well already, and we don't need those packages any more. But it
is nice to have those before class starts. I don't know what happened with this transition.
FLT 4 described that feeling overworked impacted teamwork: “We don't have a curriculum
developer, we don't have a test developer. Last semester, I was managing a curriculum team, a
test revision project, and teaching. Therefore, I have no energy and time to do anything else.”
The limited collaborative teamwork among teachers and among departments is thus seen
as a weakness in implementing differentiated instruction, which makes improving teamwork at
an organizational level a continuing need.
The Organization Must Foster a Culture of Empowering First-Line Teachers
Cochran-Smith et al. (2018) asserted that empowered employees are more likely to be
productive and efficient. At WCFLI, the interviewed language teachers expressed their
frustration regarding micromanagement and lack of trust from supervisors. When asked what
obstacles they have encountered when trying to practice differentiated instruction, nine out of
twelve discussed a lack of autonomy. FLT 8 described it as a major frustration: “A lot of micro
management, the supervisor telling you, you have to use this textbook, you have to do this. And
then that is very frustrating because the management are not in the classroom, they don't always
know the students’ situation.” FLT 4 said, “When I was observed by a supervisor, he doesn't
believe in differentiated instruction. Like, oh, but this student doesn't get to read that section A
(material). So sometimes, a supervisor is difficult to convince.” Moreover, teachers were
assigned specific teaching duties rather than being giving trust and autonomy. FLT 5 mentioned,
“We have to follow a very set of curriculum based activities, and we have very set of things that

85
we need to cover within the teaching hours. So there is not very much room to implement
anything here.”
Further, the remaining teachers interviewed – who felt that they were given more
flexibility – indicated that this autonomy helps them implement differentiated instruction to tailor
the lessons to student needs. FLT 11 described that this approach is more effective:
Our department we don't have textbooks as of the end of the first semester. This is very
important, and I really wish that other departments will apply…. It gives you the chance
to be creative, to choose the passage, to decide how to present your passage according to
the needs [of students]…. And students, they love it because we are not stressing them
out rushing through the textbooks…. It’s one of the big keys for success.
FLT 3 described a similar flexibility: “Curriculum I say always is a guideline. My supervisor
agrees too…. I do it if students like it, if no, I can change.”
As such, most first-line language teachers were struggling to apply differentiated
instruction because of micromanagement and a lack of autonomy, which makes empowering
teachers a continuing need.
The Organization Must Provide the Necessary Resources to Conduct Differentiated
Instruction
Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003) concluded that whether a teacher’s resource needs
are met impacts student learning outcomes. Ensuring that the faculty’s needed resources are
provided is crucial for the success of assigned teaching tasks. When the teachers at WCFLI were
asked what resources, if any, they would want the organization to provide in order to apply DI
effectively, three major needs were identified: ten out of twelve teachers indicated more time,
eight indicated a larger workforce, and eight indicated more professional-development support.

86
A majority of teachers interviewed specifically indicated that having sufficient time is
invaluable for conducting DI effectively. FLT 1 described the current workload at WCFLI:
Every day, we have to teach at least three hours, sometimes four hours, and we check
homework, and we have other admin duties and check emails. It is hard to find the right
material, develop the right tools and activities for students for all those three hours.
Moreover, differentiated instruction itself is time-consuming. FLT 6 described, “It was a
nightmare to plan because you wanted continuity. You pretty much plan plus one more course
for that particular student or group of students.” Seven teachers requested an extension to the
course length to relieve the amount of material that must be taught in a limited time frame. FLT
1 noted, “It is hard to differentiate when the time frame is as narrow as it is for our program.”
FLT 9 spoke directly to supervisors to describe how the limited available time prevents some
students from reaching the target proficiency levels: “You need to realize that there are students
that within the time frame given cannot reach 2+.” FLT 7 suggested differentiating the course
length according to student proficiency:
I don't know the feasibility of that. But yeah, because there are certain students that could
finish early and it’d be great just, okay, we love you but get out. And then there are other
students that need the extra time of post DLPT but without ...calling it post DLPT is
depressing. But if you're just, okay, we're going to split you into two tracks and you're
going to go eight weeks longer and you're going to go a week shorter and I don't know.
And then they don't feel like they failed their DLPT and now they’re on post DLPT now
it's just, well, my track is longer.
Overall, the current time constraints on teachers were identified as an important limitation on
applying DI in classrooms.

87
Another resource that language teachers consistently requested is an expansion of the
workforce. FLT 4 said, “Right now we only have two instructors to cover seven hours of
instruction every day, and we need to create material, tests, activities for everything. Even the
days that I take leave, I was asked to provide quizzes, homework before I go.” FLT 10 offered a
similar sentiment in detail:
We have five classes at the same time and we only have eight teachers, each class have
seven hours a day, which means every teacher have to teach four to five hours a day. If
one teacher call in sick, the rest of us are suffering. And how can you not get sick
working so much? I mean WCFLI is known for hardworking place. And whenever I go, I
mean I have a lot of friends who are principals or teachers at other schools. You’re at
WCFLI, don’t they work you out until you either sick or dead? But that’s the gossip. I
didn’t mention it. I kind of, well. I go to the doctor, Oh, this is WCFLI disease. It’s
something that they [leadership] need to consider if they really want teachers to give their
very best.
Other teachers also noted the problem caused by being overworked. When language teachers
were overworked, it was physically draining and also mentally fatiguing. They were not given
enough time to be effective, and they do not have the physical and mental energy to do so.
The third resource requested by language teachers is additional professional-development
support, which includes training, mentoring programs, modeling sessions, and sharing sessions.
In this context, training is about how to apply a teacher’s knowledge and skills to daily
classroom activities. As Denler (2009) suggested, modeled behavior is more likely to be adopted
if the model is credible, similar, and the behavior has functional value. FLT 2 said, “I think
maybe not necessarily more training is needed, but support to help teachers transfer that training
to the classroom.” FLT 12 reinforced this: “Not just give training and sort of like hope that it

88
happens.” Several teachers specifically requested mentoring, modeling, and sharing sessions in
addition to more standard training. FLT 8 requested “definitely more coaching from the more
experienced teachers. So that’s a kind of like mentoring program that helps the teacher.” FLT 2
similarly requested “some modeling by a teacher that’s comfortable so seeing how other teachers
do it.” FLT 5 said, “Even the ideas among the teachers about differentiated instruction is not
even shared. Like if someone is doing a good lesson, why doesn't he or she share it with
everyone else. I think this is not very widespread or dominant, at least where I work.”
As such, interviewed language teachers were concerned about limited time, an
insufficient workforce, and a lack of professional development support. All three are therefore
continuing organizational resource needs.
The Organization Must Have an Effective Accountability System
Dowd and Shieh (2013) concluded that an effective accountability system must specify
how performance is measured and detail the consequent reward or penalty. At WCFLI, the
interviewed language teachers described feeling demotivated because there is no transparent and
effective appraisal system. When asked what resources they would want the organization to
provide and whether they had anything to add about the topic, six of twelve language teachers
noted having low motivation to go the extra mile to implement DI because there is no transparent
and effective appraisal system to recognize their efforts. Language teachers who put in the effort
to differentiate their instruction did not receive the recognition they expected. FLT 4 described
this perceived lack of recognition for effort:
I am in charge of doing all the team leader responsibilities, but they do not call me a team
leader. They do not give me the 20 hours of time off award. They call me a lead
instructor, not a team leader. I don't get the perks of the team leading but I do the
responsibilities.

89
FLT 10 noted the demotivational consequences of the current system:
I object the reward system that they have. They give the bonus money to a certain
number of teachers which is good, but it is not good. Because for certain number of the
faculty (including supervisors and teachers) last year, they gave $2000, and then for a
certain number $1500. For the rest of the faculty, about 30% or so, nothing. If you can
give them something, that will boost the morale and encourage them.
FLT 12 described that her supervisor cannot give her the maximum rating of five even when she
does an excellent job, because her supervisor does not have enough points to distribute:
Why do you have an allocation of points? Why can't you give points based on the
performance? Why don't you answer why I can’t give fives? Because of others? What
kind of rating is that? If everyone perform well, not one gets reward, and if everyone
perform poor, no one gets reward, then, why we try hard? No matter what I do, I get a
three.
The perception is that in this environment many language teachers aim to perform at only a
mediocre level. FLT 2 noted, “If they can meet the standards, they don’t need to reach further.
They don't want extra effort.” FLT 8 concluded that “it is just so much easier to just get textbook
and everybody do the same. Why bother to differentiate?”
Language teachers were thus not supported to put in the effort to apply differentiated
instruction because of the ineffective accountability system. Improving this system is therefore a
newly identified need.
Ideas from Language-School Leaders on Organizational Needs
The interview data from the school leaders presents examples that validate the literature
review and affirm the organizational needs expressed by language teachers at WCFLI. For
example, the school leaders noted that limited teamwork among language teachers is one of the

90
obstacles to implementing DI. FLSL 2 said, “We can't be in an isolated island working by
yourself. There's no such thing as a successful island.” School leaders expressed considerable
concern about the teamworking abilities of language teachers. FLSL 1 commented, “In fact, I
think most everyone's standards, elements of attendance probably have teamwork on there. But
do we really understand what that means? I mean, gathering together around the table, it does not
make you a team.” FLSL 3 also suggested that “there’s a lot of human factors for how teams
function. So maybe some teams do not have a good dynamic. It’s the mixture of personalities on
that team is not working well together and that has implications for students.” FLSL 3
specifically commented on teamwork between departments:
Our associate provost talks about opening the umbrella. So, I think that’s expanded to the
whole [WCFLI] and there’s not enough collaboration and that people are isolated, people
are doing their own thing and there’s people with expertise in different areas and they’re
not being utilized. So, I think that’s one of the areas for improvement at the [WCFLI]. I
think it’s been recognized that some schools are more successful than others.
FLSL 1 also noted a need for “support from faculty trainers, from Student Learning Services,
and from the academic specialists, from the chair, from leadership. Everyone should come
together to offer to provide support to the teacher. If there’s no support, the teacher will fail.”
Further, the leadership emphasizes collaboration specifically, which is different from simply
cooperation. On this point, FLSL 2 said,
You're like an isolated person. You can't afford to do that. Collaboration, the leadership
itself, I think in order to remedy the challenge of support, it should come from the leader,
from team leader up to the chair to the dean, to project to the idea of collaboration
because among the teachers they need to understand that they can't afford to be isolated.
They need to work together.

91
A consistent theme among the responses is that departments must sit down together and work on
projects and tasks with joint thoughts and effort.
In regard to empowering teachers, the teachers consider supervisors’ classroom
observation as an unpleasant negative element of the teacher-supervisor relationship. However,
school leaders believe it is an opportunity for positive reinforcement if supervisors do it properly.
FLSL 1 listed this as an important point of connection with teachers:
I think regularly and meaningfully observing classes. By meaningful observation, I mean
you are there to really pick out the things that the teacher is doing right and also be able
to pick out the things that can be improved. Usually, we have this negative connotation
that when someone is observing a class that he’s there to judge the student and watch
where the teacher failed in areas that he or she’s not doing well. It should be the opposite.
Actually, I’m more interested in what he or she is doing right so I can compile best
practices and make a list of best practices, a robust list of best practices and share it with
the other faculty. It’s not only positively reinforcing that the teacher, what he or she is
doing that’s right but it’s also confidence building, it builds confidence.
This leader attempts to empower teachers by encouraging them to continue applying successful
practices. The leader described how providing attention and care to language teachers can also
boost the teachers’ working morale: “Support, it’s not always training. It can just be a quick visit.
If you’re in the leadership position, a quick visit to the faculty room and say how things are
going to see how things are going.”
Further, all three school leaders agreed that the institution should provide more resources
to language teachers, especially in terms of time and manpower. FLSL 1 said, “Time is not on
the teachers’ side. However, it’s really up to the teacher to manage his or her own time.”
Regarding manpower, all three leaders noted that manpower is directly connected with time. If

92
there is enough time, less manpower is fine (and vice versa). FLSL 2 added, “We have very high
goals within short time frames and if it’s not going to change, something has to give. There
needs to be more time for teachers to prepare for it.”
In terms of establishing an effective accountability system, all three leaders described the
merits of the existing system to assess teacher performance. FLSL 1 listed class observations,
end-of-course evaluations, and student performance. FLSL 2 also mentioned sharing sessions
and presentations. Moreover, FLSL 3 also proposed an avenue for improvement: “How we can
improve the whole system for diagnosing the strength is that all faculty come in with and coming
up with a more concerted plan with areas that they could work on.” However, the school leaders
did not place any importance on the reward system following performance assessment. They do
not appear to be aware that teachers are very mindful of the reward system and it has a
significant impact on motivation to perform, which then impacts student academic performance.
One school leader thought that the whole team should receive credit because the organization
implements team-teaching mechanisms, while some teachers wish to claim all the success for
themselves. FLSL 1 said, “If we all work as a team, then the team should get credit, but we still
think individually. Sure, we work as a team, but I want the recognition. She wants, he wants the
recognition.” There is therefore a meaningful discrepancy between school leaders’ focus and
language teachers’ requests. As such, establishing an effective accountability system is a newly
identified organizational need.
Summary Results and Findings for Organizational Needs
Regarding the assumed organizational needs for helping students achieve higher
proficiency levels at WCFLI, the interview data suggests three areas of continuing need and one
newly identified need. Language teachers indicated that there is a need to improve the teamwork
among teachers and departments. However, school leaders thought that team teaching had been

93
implemented successfully over the years, and school leaders thought that the assigned support
team was coordinating seamlessly with teaching teams. Therefore, improving this teamwork is a
continuing need. In the interviews, language teachers indicated that teaching autonomy is not
fully practiced, but school leaders also asserted that the institute has been providing leaders with
a variety of training to promote trust and empower teachers. As such, there might be an oversight
on this issue at a lower supervisory level. Nonetheless, improving autonomy is confirmed as a
continuing need. Teachers also called for additional resources, in particular more time, a larger
workforce, and more professional-development support. School leaders were already aware that
these resources were not fully fulfilled. However, there is limited funding for language programs,
and financial constraints prevent the provision of more time or employees. In terms of
professional-development support, school leaders indicated that there are already support teams
allocated in each school to serve that purpose, which is different from language teachers’
feedback. This is therefore also confirmed as a continuing need. After data analysis, an
additional need was also identified: language teachers indicated that the work they do is not
appropriately evaluated or appreciated. School leaders had not been aware of a need in this area
or the potential effects on implementing DI and meeting organizational goals. As such,
improving the evaluation system is also confirmed as a continuing need.
Emerging Themes
The analysis in this study identified both current assets and continuing knowledge,
motivational, and organizational needs. From this, three themes emerge regarding language
teachers helping adult students to achieve a higher language proficiency level through
differentiated instruction at WCFLI: building a safe professional-development platform for
mentoring, modeling, sharing, and feedback; implementing an effective accountability system
that is accepted by both leaders and faculty; and creating an effective mechanism to improve

94
collaboration both horizontally and vertically. Collaboration does not only mean effective
teamwork within and between departments but also means teacher empowerment. These three
themes interweave with each other and influence each other.
Building a Safe Professional-Development Platform
According to both language teachers and school leaders, there are a variety of training
programs and workshops about DI at WCFLI. However, these are theoretical and lack a direct
applied context, which leads to the problem of ineffective application of DI. Several interviewed
language teachers mentioned that DI could negatively affect students’ learning outcomes and
their learning morale when applied incorrectly. Therefore, follow-up with teachers’
implementation after training is important (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Both language
teachers and school leaders noted that they would like to undertake professional-development
opportunities besides simple training. The school leaders mentioned platforms like holiday
conference programs and other conferences hosted by schools throughout the year. However,
language teachers requested safe platforms for improvement like mentoring programs, modeling,
and sharing sessions within the institute. It is essential for WCFLI to provide general training on
differentiated instruction, but the language teachers need more help to apply the training content
to their own teaching context.
In this regard, mentoring programs are essentially a form of differentiated instruction for
instructional skills (Salgür, 2014). Mentors would help language teachers to address their
personal needs. Similarly, modeling sessions could help build language teachers’ confidence in
differentiated instruction through seeing the success of others teachers and the practical strategies
they employ (Denler, 2009). Sharing sessions could both answer the questions of junior teachers
and help to build collective self-efficacy among teachers, which would further promote
teamwork (Shen et al., 2016).

95
Implementing an Effective Accountability System
According to the interview data, language teachers have several methods for assessing
the effectiveness of their teaching. The most-utilized tools are student feedback and formative
assessments of student performance. Teachers can use these two tools to reflect on the
effectiveness of their own teaching. Similarly, school leaders have a set of methods to assess
teacher performance. In addition to the two tools mentioned by teachers, leaders also use
ESQ/ISQ, class observations, or students’ graduation performance to evaluate the teaching
effectiveness of instructors.
However, although leaders have ways to assess teachers, there is no system that includes
all of these tools and support within a unified standard to ensure that every teacher is evaluated
equally and receives recognition for their work. Language teachers expressed confusion about
the recognition system and described feeling unappreciated. Some teachers noted that they
worked harder than colleagues, but at the end of the year everyone received the same appraisal
results. As a result, some teachers are not motivated to apply differentiated instruction because
they do not feel that the additional time and effort required will be noticed or rewarded. School
leaders were unaware of this concern and suggested that the whole team should be recognized
because of the team-teaching environment. As such, in addition to improving general
collaboration, WCFLI should implement a transparent and agreed-upon accountability system to
address the current confusion and develop a reward system in line with employee values and
needs.
Creating an Effective Mechanism to Improve Collaboration
WCFLI has critical continuing needs that are rooted in collaboration barriers among
teachers, between supervisors and teachers, and among supervisors in different departments. As

96
such, the institute needs to build an effective mechanism to improve collaboration horizontally
and vertically.
One of the organizational continuing needs is to foster a culture of teamwork. At WCFLI,
team teaching is standard. However, according to the language teachers’ interview data, this
teamwork is not efficient. Team teaching at present is more like dividing teaching duties than
actual collaboration. Language teachers are assigned certain blocks of teaching, they need to
finish the assigned duties, and the rest is up to them. Typically, there is no remaining time for
additional collaboration. Given the workload, it is necessary to split duties – this is one function
of teamwork. However, it is not the only function. As Clark and Estes (2008) described, for a
team to exist, the team members must play different roles or bring different skills to the table. In
addition to teachers completing their core duties, the organizational goal is to help students
achieve proficiency levels 2+/2+/2. To attain this goal within the available time and resources, it
is necessary for language teachers to collaborate.
Another organizational need is to foster a culture of empowering first-line teachers. The
language teachers described that they are limited in DI by the rigid rules and requirements
assigned to them. However, school leaders indicated that language teachers should make their
own decisions and take initiative in teaching. There are two layers of leadership between the
interviewed teachers and school leaders, and it appears that there is some miscommunication
along the chain of command. Creating effective mechanisms for collaboration would contribute
meaningfully towards meeting organizational performance goals.
Summary of Assumed Needs and Emerging Themes
In combining the assumed knowledge, motivational, and organizational needs of teachers
at WCFLI, three areas were identified as current assets and five as continuing needs, and three
new needs emerged.

97
In terms of knowledge needs, teachers have a strong knowledge of what differentiated
instruction is, and they reflect on their own teaching through student feedback and formative
assessments. However, they lack a deeper understanding of how to conduct differentiated
instruction systematically and how to transfer theories learned in training to practices in different
teaching contexts. In terms of motivational needs, teachers believe that they are capable of
applying differentiated instruction by themselves, but they lack faith in the ability of their
colleagues to apply DI correctly. Moreover, they are pressed by the performance requirements of
standard tests and do not consider DI to be efficient enough to produce the necessary results.
In terms of organizational needs, the current continuing needs are to foster a culture of
teamwork and to empower first-line teachers. Further, the organization needs to provide the
necessary resources for teachers to conduct differentiated instruction. Additionally, the
organization needs to create an effective accountability system.
Across the knowledge, motivational, and organizational assets and needs at WCFLI, the
data suggests three emerging themes to consider for teachers in helping adult students to achieve
a higher proficiency level: creating an effective mechanism to improve collaboration
(horizontally and vertically), implementing an effective accountability system that is agreed-on
by both leaders and faculty, and building a safe professional-development platform for
mentoring, modeling, sharing, and feedback. Chapter Five addresses these emerging themes and
presents evidence-based recommendations with a plan to implement and evaluate differentiated
instruction at WCFLI.

98
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION
Introduction and Overview
The findings from this study are valuable for determining what knowledge, skills,
motivation, and organizational supports are needed by foreign-language teachers to help students
achieve a higher proficiency level. The goal is that by October 2022 all teachers at West Coast
Foreign Language Institute (WCFLI) will successfully demonstrate high-quality differentiated
instruction (DI) skills learned through a teacher-training program provided by the organization,
such that by the end of fiscal year 2023 all students are successfully graduating from the Basic
course without delay for academic reasons, which is graduating with 2+/2+/2. This chapter takes
the current needs established by the interview data and offers policy recommendations that
support achieving this goal. These recommendations are based on established theories and
presented with suggestions from the interview data. Additionally, the chapter establishes an
implementation and evaluation plan according to the Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016), which supports the effectiveness of the action plan.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The assumed knowledge needs for teachers to support adult foreign-language learners to
reach a high proficiency level are that: 1) teachers need to know what differentiated instruction
entails, 2) teachers need to know how to conduct differentiated instruction, 3) teachers need to be
able to reflect on teaching and evaluate when to adjust their methods, and 4) teachers need to
know how to connect research to practice.
Among these assumed knowledge needs, knowing what differentiated instruction entails
and being able to reflect on teaching and evaluate when to adjust methods were not validated as
knowledge gaps—most teachers were able to define the DI to a degree and most reflect regularly

99
based on different feedback and using different methods. As such, this study does not emphasize
these two factors. However, teachers knowing how to conduct differentiated instruction and how
to connect research to practice were validated as gaps. According to the findings, even successful
and experienced teachers were unable to systematically and holistically articulate how to conduct
differentiated instruction. Further, only three out of twelve experienced teachers in this study
were able to effectively transfer the theories learned from workshops to their classroom. These
two knowledge needs, if addressed, will have the most significant impact on achieving the
organizational goals. Therefore, these needs are prioritized in the following recommendations.
Table 9 summarizes the findings regarding assumed knowledge needs.
Table 9
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Knowledge
Influence

Validated
as a Gap?
Yes, No

Priori
ty
Yes,
No

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers
know what
differentiated
instruction
entails. (D)
No No n/a n/a
Teachers
know how to
conduct
differentiated
instruction.
(P)
Yes Yes 1. Modeled behavior is more
likely to be adopted if the
model is credible and similar
(e.g., gender, culturally
appropriate) and the behavior
has functional value (Denler,
2009)
2. Effective observational
learning is achieved by first
organizing and rehearsing the
modeled behaviors, then
enacting them overtly (Mayer,
2011).
1. Provide time and
resources for
teachers to model
their teaching and
coach their peers.
2. Have supervisors
reinforce
individual
development plans
regarding
differentiated
instruction, then
provide feedback
and follow up with
teachers.

100
3. Feedback that is private,
specific, and timely enhances
performance (Shute, 2008).
Teachers are
able to reflect
on teaching
and evaluate
when to
adjust
methods. (M)
No No n/a n/a
Teachers
know how to
connect
research to
practice.
Yes Yes 1. To develop mastery,
individuals must acquire
component skills, practice
integrating them, and know
when to apply what they
have learned (McCrudden et
al., 2006).
2. Facilitating transfer promotes
learning (Mayer, 2011).

1. Provide
opportunities for
teachers to adapt
skills and transfer
them in workshops
with facilitator
assistance.
2. Host sharing and
modelling sessions
and build mentoring
programs to
exchange
experiences adapting
DI to different
teaching contexts.

Increasing Procedural Knowledge About Differentiated Instruction
The findings of this study indicate that the experienced teachers did not know how to
implement differentiated instruction systematically. A recommendation rooted in social cognitive
theory informs a practical approach for addressing this gap: according to Denler (2009), modeled
behavior is more likely to be adopted if the model is credible and contextually similar and the
behavior has functional value. The research suggested that teachers need to see how other
experienced teachers conduct differentiated instruction in a similar teaching context. One
recommendation, therefore, is that WCFLI provide time and resources for experienced teachers
to model their teaching and mentor their peers. For example, the organization could host regular
sharing sessions to gather experienced teachers to model their differentiated classes and receive

101
feedback from their peers. Per the surveys in this study, even though no teacher is conducting
differentiated instruction systematically, every teacher nonetheless has shining points in adapting
differentiated instruction to specific teaching contexts that could benefit other teachers working
in similar contexts.
Hosting regular modelling sessions is necessary because concrete examples and case
studies significantly encourage implementation (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). Moreover, it is better
to present information in a familiar situation (Mayer, 2011). Teachers coaching each other
should thus come from the same teaching context. Further, as McCrudden et al. (2006) noted, it
is essential to model effective strategy use in detail. For example, model how to apply DI and
when to apply DI. DI is more effective to model than to train. During the modeling sessions,
teachers can observe the whole process and grasp the nuances of how and when to apply new
methods. By showcasing and sharing these kinds of sessions, teachers can learn from each other
and apply differentiated instruction systematically.
Improving Teachers’ Skills to Connect Research to Practice
This study identified that nine out of twelve experienced teachers surveyed did not know
how to effectively connect research and theories they were learning around DI to classroom
practice. They knew definitions and models about differentiated instruction but discussed
obstacles when applying DI in classrooms. A recommendation rooted in information processing
system theory offers an approach for closing this gap. McCrudden et al. (2006) suggested that to
master a skill, people must understand and practice until they know what to apply, when, and
how. The research suggested that in addition to understanding DI, teachers must practice the
knowledge and skills until they find the best way to adapt it into their teaching context. This
study therefore recommends that teachers be provided opportunities to adapt DI skills in
different scenarios during a workshop with facilitators’ support. Then, after the workshop,

102
sharing sessions, model sessions, and mentoring programs would allow teachers to exchange
experiences about adapting DI in different teaching contexts. Therefore, even though the DI
teachers learned from the workshop is the same, the DIs applied in reality might manifest in
different versions.
For example, after the facilitators introduce general theories about DI and its
implementation models, teachers can be grouped based on their teaching context and then
brainstorm possible obstacles that would inhibit implementation of DI in that context. With the
help of facilitators and other group members, teachers can identify solutions to support the
implementation of DI in their own context. Further, these groups could address a variety of
scenarios where DI meets obstacles during implementation, solving the problems together. After
the workshop, the teachers would be better equipped to apply these solutions in their classrooms.
While not all issues will be discussed during the workshop, regular sharing and modeling
sessions after the workshop can potentially address the newly identified obstacles. For teachers
who struggle most, the organization could set up a mentoring system to offer support for
individuals.
Facilitating the transfer of knowledge promotes learning (Mayer, 2011), and teachers
benefit from these prompts during workshops to inspire implementation in practice. Providing
opportunities for teachers to practice skills and transform skills is a key component of successful
teaching/training (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009), so the adaption and practice component of
workshops is essential. Further, job assistance, which is informal on-the-job trainings, is also
crucial to ensure implementation. Modeling effective strategy use, including how and when to
use particular strategies, reinforces teachers’ learning after the workshop and the practical
application of methodologies (McCrudden et al., 2006). According to the findings in this report,
most teachers experience difficulties applying DI freely and effectively most of the time, even if

103
they know it very well from a theoretical perspective. Thus, WCFLI would benefit from
workshops that feature follow-up mentoring, sharing, and modeling sessions. Supervisors must
follow up with teachers, not only because a supervisor can provide performance feedback
(Mayer, 2011) but also because this increases teacher motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Motivation Recommendations
The assumed motivation needs for teachers to support adult foreign-language learners in
reaching high proficiency level per the findings of this report are that: 1) teachers need to believe
that if they apply differentiated instruction they can achieve the educational goal for adult
advanced language acquisition, and 2) teachers need to believe that they can effectively
implement differentiated instruction. The first assumed need was validated by this study as a gap.
All teachers believe that differentiated instruction will only positively influence students’
learning when it is conducted correctly, and seven out of twelve teachers think DI will negatively
affect learning if conducted incorrectly. Those seven teachers expressed concerns about
collective self-efficacy. Further, the second assumed need was partially validated as a gap. All
teachers have individual self-efficacy in implementing DI effectively, but most feel that there is a
lack of collective self-efficacy in implementing DI. The relevant motivational influence is
therefore that teachers need to believe that their colleagues can work with them to implement DI
effectively. The two needs validated as a gap have significant impact on achieving the
organizational goals. Therefore, these two motivation needs are prioritized in the following
recommendations. Table 10 summarizes the findings of the assumed motivation needs.
Table 10
Summary of Motivational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Motivational
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, No

Priority
Yes,
No

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation

104
Teachers
believe that if
they apply
differentiated
instruction,
students can
achieve the
educational goal
for adult
advanced
language
acquisition.
Yes Yes 1. Learning tasks that are
similar to those common
to the individual’s
familiar cultural settings
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
2. It is important to provide
feedback that stresses
the process of learning,
including the importance
of effort, strategies, and
potential self-control
(Anderman, et al.,
2018).
1. Host sharing
sessions of
successful
implementation of
DI.
2. Provide
constructive and
appropriate
feedback to
teachers regarding
their effort of
implementing DI.
Teachers
believe that
they can
effectively
implement
differentiated
instruction.
No No n/a n/a
Teachers
believe that
their colleagues
can effectively
implement DI.
Yes Yes 1. Team efficacy require
team members have
interpersonal and self-
management knowledge,
skill, and abilities (Tasa et
al., 2007).
1. provide
team/collective
efficacy trainings
which focus on
communication,
collaborative problem
solving and conflict
resolution skills.

Building Teachers’ Beliefs About Differentiated Instruction
This study found that only three of twelve interviewed teachers believed that they could
achieve the educational goal for adult advanced language acquisition through DI. A principle
rooted in attribution theory offers an approach for closing this motivation gap: providing
feedback that stresses the process of learning, including the importance of effort, strategies, and
potential self-control (Anderman et al., 2018). The recommendation is to provide teachers with
constructive and appropriate written feedback regarding their differentiated instruction, focusing
on specific elements. For example, teachers can generate criteria for effective DI themselves,

105
then supervisors or mentors can be invited to observe classes informally to provide feedback for
teachers according to these criteria. Teachers should be mindful of the criteria they created,
benchmarking their performances against these standards and recognizing improvement after
following the guidance of supervisors or mentors.
Belboukhaddaoui and Ginkel (2019) suggested that before providing feedback, a
supervisor should plan out the “when,” “how,” and “what.” Immediate feedback is beneficial
because the teacher is still in the teaching context. However, delayed feedback is also helpful
because it does not interrupt the flow of teaching, and the supervisor and teacher can analyze
classroom performance together to find solutions to weaknesses. All feedback should be in
written form. Tangible feedback is easier to store and retrieve—teachers can reflect on and
compare their performance and progress any time they wish (Shute, 2008). Further, written
feedback is more organized and meaningful (Alexander, 2020). And finally, the feedback should
be constructive. Performance criteria are essential for scaffolding improvement (Tajgozari &
Alimorad, 2019), and feedback should align with specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and
timely criteria (Bjegovic-Mikanovic et al., 2019). The goal is to help teachers see and appreciate
student improvement from this teaching effort, and therefore to support their beliefs about
differentiated instruction.
Building Teachers’ Collective Self-efficacy
In this study, ten of the twelve interviewed teachers perceived a lack of collective self-
efficacy. A principle from social cognitive theory informs a practical recommendation for
addressing this gap: according to Tasa et al. (2007), team/collective efficacy requires that team
members have interpersonal and self-management knowledge, skill, and abilities. According to
the interview data analysis, teachers’ self-efficacy is one of their assets at WCFLI. Therefore,
their self-management knowledge, skill, and abilities are sufficient. To achieve team/collective

106
efficacy, teachers therefore need to improve only interpersonal knowledge, skill, and abilities.
According to Pandey and Karve (2017), interpersonal skills consist of communication,
collaborative problem-solving, and conflict-resolution. Therefore, this study recommends that
leaders provide team/collective efficacy training. For example, organizations could host regular
training to improve communication, collaborative problem-solving, and conflict-resolution skills.
This training is necessary for both novice and experienced teachers. Brown (2003) concluded
that training could improve team/collective efficacy. He conducted a study of verbal self-
guidance (VSG) training in 42 groups of undergraduate students, data from which suggests that
VSG has a positive effect on students’ team/collective efficacy. Therefore, team/collective
efficacy is trainable. The VSG can be used to train people to identify their negative statements
about their colleagues. Then, translate those negative statements into positive ones. First, the
trainer would need to model this. Then, the trainees would perform the task by speaking the
translating process out aloud. Last, the trainees would perform the task by reminding themselves
covertly. Further, Khan et al. (2018) concluded that leadership support increases team/collective
efficacy. Therefore, institutional leaders’ support in hosting VSG training sessions would help
teachers close the gap of low team/collective efficacy.
Organization Recommendations
In this study, the assumed organizational needs of teachers in supporting adult foreign
language learners to achieve a high proficiency level are: 1) the need for a culture of a supportive
community, and 2) the need for resources to conduct differentiated instruction. The findings of
this study validated both needs as a gap. Furthermore, the data analysis suggested that there was
another influence that must be addressed: the need for an effective accountability system. The
first assumed organization need, a supportive work culture, has two parts as suggested by data
analysis. The first is teamwork—half of the interviewed teachers indicated that the teamwork

107
both between departments and within their own department has room to improve. Three
interviewed teachers noted that they would prefer to work alone than in a team, even if it means
they must overwork. The second part is empowerment—seven of twelve interviewed teachers
called for more flexibility and decision-making rights. They complained about
micromanagement, and described that supervisors imposing personal academic beliefs have
inhibited effective teaching performance. All interviewed teachers noted the need for additional
resources, the absence of which adds difficulties to their daily duties. Additionally, seven out of
twelve interviewed teachers were unsatisfied with the current accountability system. They
described being demotivated by how their performance is evaluated and rewards are granted.
These three needs have significant impact on achieving organizational goals and are prioritized
in the following recommendations. Table 11 summarizes the findings of the assumed
organization needs.
Table 11
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence

Validated
as a Gap
Yes, No

Priori
ty
Yes,
No

Principle and Citation

Context-
Specific
Recommendati
on
The organization
fosters a culture of
supportive
community.

Yes Yes “Organizations with high
levels of cultural trust tend to
produce high quality products
and services at less cost
because they can recruit and
retain highly motivated
employees.” (Starnes et al.,
2010, p. 6).
1. Implement a
self-
evaluation
system.
The organization
provides the
necessary resources
to conduct
differentiated
instruction.
Yes Yes Organizational effectiveness
increases when leaders ensure
that employees have the
resources needed to achieve the
organization’s goals. Ensuring
that staff’s resource needs are
1. Align the
allocation
of resources
with the
goals and
priorities of

108
met is correlated with
increased student learning
outcomes (Waters et al., 2003).
the
organizatio
n.
2. Establish a
routine
collaboratio
n process
that solicits
needs and
establishes
priorities
for
budgeting
purposes.
The organization
offers an effective
accountability
system.
Yes Yes Measurement of learning and
performance is essential for an
effective accountability system
capable of improving
organizational performance.
Systems of accountability
should address how learning is
measured (Dowd & Shieh,
2013).
1. Create a
transparent
and effective
appraisal
system.

Fostering the Culture of a Supportive Community
In this study, all twelve surveyed teachers believed that they could apply DI more
effectively with more support from the institution. A principle rooted in leadership has been
selected to close this organizational gap: “Organizations with high levels of cultural trust tend to
produce high-quality products and services at less cost because they can recruit and retain highly
motivated employees” (Starnes et al., 2010, p. 6). This suggests that empowering faculty
members and instilling in them trust of leadership would increase productivity and efficiency.
This study therefore recommends that WCFLI implement a self-evaluation system. For example,
faculty members could score their performance for the initial year, then use improvement
percentage to add merit points for subsequent years. Giving them the power to score themselves
encourages faculty to improve their performance, and it eliminates destructive competition

109
among faculty because they are competing with themselves. However, the organization also
needs to provide a reasonable accountability system, which will be discussed later. The system
will provide quantified scores for faculty to apply to their performance appraisal.
Dyer et al. (2011) noted that teaching is a position requiring room for innovation—a
strictly formulated curriculum and schedule constrain a teacher’s creativity. Lack of flexibilities
leads to faculty members viewing their work as only a paying job rather than a meaningful
career. Moreover, teachers are the ones who directly interact with students, and empowered
teachers will be better able to accommodate students’ requests for support. Fidishun (2000)
described that adult learners resist learning if others are imposing information, ideas, or actions
on them. It is therefore vital to empower teachers to feel a sense of ownership in their teaching,
such that they are not simply imposing prescribed information on students. However, there is
presently no effective practice at WCFLI for enforcing empowerment behavior. Implementing a
self-evaluation system or including self-evaluation in the appraisal system will not only promote
autonomy among teachers, cultivating reflective educators, but also create a healthier
competition environment. Faculty will set mastery goals rather than performance goals (Elliot &
Harackiewicz, 1996).
Providing the Resources for Conducting Differentiated Instruction
In this study, all twelve interviewed teachers indicated that they lack the necessary
resources to apply DI effectively. A principle rooted in leadership has been selected to close this
organizational gap: Waters et al. (2003) concluded that organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders ensure that employees have sufficient resources to achieve the organization’s goals.
Ensuring that staff resource needs are met correlates with improved student learning outcomes.
This suggests that supplying sufficient resources to teachers will increase teaching effectiveness.
Providing sufficient resources is perhaps common sense—if an institution expects to see results

110
from students, it must provide teachers with the necessary resources. This study therefore
recommends that institutional leadership align the allocation of resources with the goals and
priorities of the organization. To align the allocation of resources with the goal and priorities of
the organization involves establishing a collaborative process to solicits needs and establish
priorities for budgeting purposes. For example, the representatives from each stakeholder group
could identify what resources are essential to accomplish the organizational mission and achieve
the stated goals, then establish a channel of communication to provide and track the allocated
resources. At the end of every fiscal year, representatives from each stakeholder group could
meet again to reevaluate and update the necessary resources.
Three key resources have been identified through interview data: time, manpower, and
professional development opportunities. Moon et al. (2018) concluded that allocating sufficient
but not excessive time is the key to increasing work efficiency. If the time provided is too short,
work will not be done correctly; however, if the time provided is too much, the labor cost is
higher but the outcome is not necessarily more satisfying. Morgan et al. (2018) further suggested
that in addition to finding the right person to do a job, it is critical to have sufficient manpower to
achieve the desired outcome. The majority of language teachers at WCFLI are native speakers
with a language-education background. However, there are not enough of them. Most are
overloaded by the increasing quantity of their workload, and, as a result, the quality of their
performance is lowered. Finally, Shernoff et al. (2017) noted that professional development
provides teachers not only with knowledge and skills but also with confidence and motivation.
As such, an organization first needs to determine what is needed to accomplish the mission, and
how much is needed. Then it must establish a stable supply channel to provide the necessary
resources and track the efficiency of providing these resources.

111
Creating an Effective Accountability System
The results of the survey in this study suggest that teachers are confused and unsatisfied
with the current accountability system at WCFLI. A principle rooted in leadership informs a
practical recommendation for addressing this gap: according to Dowd and Shieh (2013), in order
to improve organizational performance, it is essential to have an accurate measurement of
learning and performance. The research suggested that the addition of a precise assessment tool
to measure and recognize teacher performance will improve teaching. The recommendation is
therefore to create an effective and transparent accountability system. Organizations should
identify teachers’ essential duties that contribute to organizational goals, then generate criteria to
measure the performance of these duties. The criteria should be quantified, therefore, limit
ambiguity. It sounds intuitive and simple, but the crucial component is that the criteria used to
measure performance must be clear and comprehensive in order to eliminate subjective inputs.
Further, the range of scoring must be extensive enough to identify different levels of
performance. For instance, performance that is 90 percent of what is considered excellent should
not be scored at the same level as performance that is 80 percent of excellent. If one “grade”
covers a wide range of performance, then teachers will often strive only to reach the minimum
performance in that category. Further, this evaluation process must be transparent, so that
teachers know without confusion or ambiguity why they received a specific point or score.
An accountability system is highly defined by its context (Hentschke & Wohlstetter,
2004). As Lim (2015) noted, any such system should address the elements of equity, diversity,
and access. Only a fair system can properly motivate those to whom it applies, thereby
improving organizational performance. All sectors of the accountability system influence its
effectiveness, but in particular the design of its structure and the use of incentives are more
important than the types of incentive (Elmore, 2002). One of the interviewed teachers described

112
how he would prefer that the organization reduce the top 30 percent of incentives and ensure all
teachers receive something. After all, he argued, the mission is accomplished by all teachers. No
one is not doing their job. Additionally, the accountability system must evolve (Darling-
Hammond, 2015), so the creation and maintenance of an effective accountability system should
be an ongoing project for institutional leadership.
There is a difference between recommendations based on theory and a concrete plan to
implement those recommendations. The recommendations suggested here are based on
theoretical principles, and the plan reflects the organizational context in conjunction with these
recommendations. The following section proposes the implementation and evaluation package.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation framework adopted in this study is the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), based on the original Kirkpatrick Four-
Level Model of Evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). This model encourages backward
design, which means that implementation and evaluation planning begins with the goals of the
organization, and the leading indicators are concrete manifestations of reached goals. Thus,
leading indicators will be closely aligned with organizational goals. As a result, the
recommended solutions are more specific and focused. The reverse order also ensures that the
specification of behaviors leads to achieving the leading indicators, that implementation
enhances these necessary behaviors, and that the plan satisfies stakeholder requests. Designing
the implementation and evaluation plan in a reversed manner reinforces the effectiveness of the
solution and attracts more support to ensure success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

113
Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations
The mission of WCFLI is to offer the best and most efficient foreign-language education
to its students (West Coast Foreign Language Institute, 2018, “Mission”). The most recent
organizational goal is that by the end of fiscal year 2026 all students enrolled the Basic course
will attain ILR levels 2+/2+/2. This study addresses what knowledge, skills, motivation, and
organizational support regarding differentiated instruction the language teachers need to help
students reach this goal. The focused stakeholders are language teachers, and the goal is that by
the end of 2022 all teachers will demonstrate high-quality differentiated instruction in their
classrooms. According to the data from the interviews, most participants believe that applying
differentiated instruction effectively in language classrooms improves students’ proficiency
level. Therefore, the language teachers are encouraged to acquire DI knowledge through training,
sharing sessions, or modeling sessions with the support of the organization.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The goal of the organization is to help foreign language students achieve a higher
proficiency level. How can language teachers implement effective teaching practices that
positively influence student performance? This study focuses on one teaching approach in
particular: differentiated instruction. All of the interviewed teachers and leaders mentioned this
teaching approach in one way or another and often noted the knowledge and skill, motivational,
or organizational barriers that prevent teachers from implementing this teaching approach
effectively. Emerging themes from the interview data regarding teachers’ needs in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational support include a safe professional-development
platform, an effective accountability system, and an effective mechanism to improve
collaboration. As such, these are the internal outcomes that the organization must achieve to
prepare for the final organizational goals. This is shown in Table 12.

114
Table 12
Leading Indicators, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Leading Indicators Metric(s) Method(s)
Internal Outcomes
1. A safe professional-
development platform

1a. The number of
professional-development
sessions hosted

1a. Compare the professional-
development sessions hosted
over the years.
1b. The position of the hosts of
the professional-development
sessions

1b. Solicit the information of the
hosts who initiated the
professional-development
sessions.
2. An effective
accountability system
2a. The retention rate of
teachers
2a. Compare the retention rate
over the years.
2b. The number of appeals
received after the annual
appraisal period
2b. Compare the appeal requests
received over the years.
3. An effective mechanism
to improve collaboration
3a. The number of meetings
hosted among teachers and
departments
3a. Supervisor tracks the
number of meetings hosted by
teachers and departments.
3b. The amount of information
shared among teachers and
departments
3b. Supervisor tracks the
information shared among
teachers and departments during
the meetings.
External Outcomes
4. More government
officials sent to WCFLI
for foreign-language
training
The number of foreign-
language students admitted to
WCFLI
Compare the admission data
over the years.
5. Receiving more credits
in future American
Council of Education
(ACE) program
accreditation review
The number of credit points
received in the ACE program
review
Compare credits received with
those in previous years.

The desired outcomes are divided into external and internal outcomes, which are also
leading indicators for achieving the final organizational goal of proficiency levels 2+/2+/2. To
ensure the achievement of the leading indicators, metrics for each leading indicator can be

115
measured using the suggested methods. If the measurement of all leading indicators improves,
then the institution is closer to reaching its goals. In order to support the external outcomes, the
organization must start from the internal outcomes: a safe professional-development platform, an
effective accountability system, and an effective mechanism to improve collaboration. These
leading indicators will not improve by themselves. A set of behaviors must be learned and
applied by foreign-language teachers. The next section explores these critical behaviors.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
The stakeholders of focus are the foreign-language teachers at WCFLI. As described in
chapter four, the emerging themes are synthesized from several knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influencers. In order to improve these emerging themes, which are also internal
outcomes, teachers must address the influencers identified by the interview data. As such, the
first critical behavior is that the teachers should believe that differentiated instruction will help
students achieve higher proficiency levels, the second is that teachers effectively implement
differentiated instruction, the third is that teachers connect research with practice, the fourth is
that teachers believe in their colleagues’ ability to conduct differentiated instruction, and the fifth
is that teachers work with each other effectively. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for
each of these behaviors are described in Table 13.
Table 13
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Believing that
differentiated
instruction
helps students
achieve higher
The number of
differentiated
instruction strategies
used in the classroom
Supervisors track
teachers’ reports
regarding differentiated
instruction.
Weekly

116
proficiency
levels
2. Effectively
implementing
differentiated
instruction
3. Connecting
research with
practice
The number of times
students note in End
of Semester
Questionnaires (ESQ)
that teachers
successfully addressed
their needs
Supervisors track ESQs
regarding differentiated
instruction.
Twice per course
4. Believing in
colleagues’
ability to
conduct
differentiated
instruction
5. Establishing
effective
teamwork
among teachers
The number of times
teachers work
together to develop
students’ learning
plans
Supervisors monitor
teachers’ work through
weekly reports and
meetings.
Weekly

Several metrics are available to indicate the presence of critical behaviors. Supervisors
can use the methods suggested in the table to conduct timely assessment and ensure that teachers
are applying the desired behavior. Even though teachers know the importance of these critical
behaviors, the organization must support and motivate teachers to work on such behaviors
through required drivers.
Required Drivers
Teachers require the support of their direct supervisors and the organization to reinforce
what they learn in training and to encourage them to apply what they learn in their classroom.
Rewards and recognition should be established for the achievement of performance goals to
enhance the organizational support of teachers. Table 14 shows the recommended drivers to
support critical behaviors.
Table 14
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors

117
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1-5
Reinforcing
Establishing teamwork among
departments
Ongoing 1,2,3,4,5
Providing necessary resources
and professional-development
platforms
Ongoing 2,3,5
Encouraging
Empowering first-line
teachers to adjust their
textbook according to student
needs
Ongoing 1,2,3
Rewarding
Implementing an effective
accountability system,
providing rewards and
recognition according to valid
criteria
Annually 2,3,5
Monitoring
Tracking teachers’ reports and
ESQs.
Ongoing 1,2,3
Monitoring teachers’
meetings.
Ongoing 4,5

Level 2: Learning
This level is to evaluate participants’ knowledge, skill, attitude, confidence, and
commitment based on the participation of the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). To
ensure participants’ positive attitude, confidence, and commitment, the training should first
contain valuable knowledge and skills. The critical behavior identified earlier will determine
what learning goals the training should achieve. Therefore, the design of the training should start
with the learning goals.
Learning Goals
Following the application of the recommended solutions, the stakeholders will be able to
1. Conduct diagnostic assessments and determine students’ strengths and weaknesses.
2. Choose suitable content tailored to students’ needs.

118
3. Utilize a variety of methods to deliver knowledge and skills.
4. Assign different tasks according to students’ individual profiles.
5. Transfer and adapt learned theories into real-life applications.
6. Reach an agreement with colleagues on the foundational theories of differentiated
instruction.
7. Communicate and collaborate with colleagues in planning differentiated instruction,
based on consensus regarding theoretical foundations.
8. Value the positive influences of differentiated instruction.
Program
The learning goals listed in the previous section can be achieved with a training program
that explores differentiated instruction and its application in depth, through which participants
learn directly applicable knowledge and skills. The specific program offered here is blended,
consisting of twelve one-hour e-learning modules and six one-hour face-to-face online meetings,
followed by one month of on-call mentoring.
Through the asynchronous e-learning modules, learners will receive training and job
support with critical terms and references for differentiated instruction. The leading questions for
the application of these modules are the following: 1) What is DI? 2) Why employ DI? 3) What
are the challenges and concerns we are currently experiencing regarding DI, and how can we
overcome them? 4) What is diagnostic assessment (DA), and how is it performed? 5) How do we
differentiate content, process, and products? and 6) How can we conduct DI as a team? The
training will use videos, charts, documents, and PowerPoint presentations to demonstrate the
relevant knowledge and skills. After each module, the training will provide scenarios in which
participants can apply and implement what they just learned. After completing the module,
participants will meet online with their peers to present and discuss the assignments are each

119
module, where they can offer feedback to each other and revise their answers as needed.
Participants will also write a reflection regarding what they have learned in each module and
their plans for implementation.
During the month of on-call mentoring, participants will apply what they learned from
the workshop in their real-life classroom, then report to their mentor weekly by reflecting on
implementation progress, challenges, solutions, and plans. They can also involve their direct
supervisor in discussion and feedback. The final project will be a full week’s textbook content,
differentiated and implemented with at least one colleague.
Evaluation of Learning Components
Learning knowledge and skills is the first step before applying them to solve problems.
Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate participants’ declarative knowledge and procedural
knowledge and skills. Additionally, it is crucial to ensure that participants value the training and
the training content so that they can build confidence by applying the knowledge and skills
learned in the workshop. Table 15 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components
of learning.
Table 15
Evaluation of the Learning Components of the Program
Method or Activity Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge check through group discussion, peer
feedback, and individual comments
During the workshop
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Scenarios with a list of choices when practicing
differentiated instruction
During the workshop
Individual demonstration of conducting
differentiated instruction
During the workshop
Quality feedback from peers during group
sharing
During and after the workshop
Pair/group work applying DI with real-life
textbook content
During and after the workshop

120
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
survey asking participants about their level of
proficiency before and after training
At the end of the workshop
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Facilitator’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that they
understand the benefit of applying DI
During the workshop
Discussion of the value of what they are being
asked to do with DI on the job
During the workshop
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion following practice and feedback During the workshop
Survey using scaled items Before and after the workshop, then one
month after the workshop
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Collaborative tasks/projects with colleagues Immediately after the workshop, then one
month after the workshop
Discussions about what to do on the job Immediately after the workshop, then one
month after the workshop

Level 1: Reaction
The first level of Kirkpatrick’s four level evaluation model is reaction, specifically, the
reaction of participants or key stakeholders. To what extent do they find the training is valuable
and relevant to reach the goal (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)? This level is to evaluate
participants’ engagement, their perceptions of the relevance of the training, and the customer
satisfaction. Table 16 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of learning.
Table 16
Components for Measuring Reactions to the Program
Method or Tool Timing
Engagement
Attendance of participants During the workshop
Participation observed by facilitators During the workshop
Completion of tasks and projects Before and during the workshop
Observation from direct supervisor After the workshop, and ongoing observation
Certification documents submitted by
participants
One month after the workshop
Relevance

121
Pre- and post-program survey asking
participants about their thoughts regarding
relevance
Before and after the workshop
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via
discussion and feedback
During the workshop
Course evaluation After the workshop

Evaluation Tools and Data Analysis for Reporting
Follow-up With Program Participants
The program will use three questionnaires as evaluation tools. The first survey (Appendix
C) will be distributed at the beginning of the workshop. The purpose of this questionnaire is to
determine participants’ perspectives regarding the value of the workshop, their commitment to
the workshop, their confidence and self-efficacy about differentiated instruction, and their
knowledge about DI. The second (Appendix D) will be distributed at the end of the workshop. Its
purpose is to compare and identify changes in participants’ perspectives, if any, regarding the
value of the workshop. The workshop designer can use this information to decide if the
workshop is relevant to participants’ work and make needed adjustments. Additionally, this
questionnaire will also compare participants’ confidence and knowledge about DI before and
after the workshop. The data will also include participants’ opinions about some of the elements
in the workshop according to the suggestions from interview data. For example, the workshop
will have adaptation sessions where participants can practice the newly learned knowledge and
skills in real-life situations in their teaching context, helping them to connect research and
theories to practice. Similarly, the interview data indicates that teachers perceived low collective
self-efficacy in their colleagues, and so the workshop will design sessions to have participants
work together to help them appreciate the effectiveness of teamwork. The after-workshop
questionnaire will evaluate teachers’ willingness to work together, which can be compared with

122
results from the later follow-up questionnaire. The third questionnaire (Appendix E) is this
follow-up survey, distributed one-month after the workshop. According to Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016), the follow-up after the workshop is more important than the actual
workshop. This questionnaire focuses on identifying real-life obstacles to implementing DI in
different teaching contexts. This data can be collected and discussed in future sharing, modeling,
or mentoring sessions. Additionally, the questionnaire can compare participants’ confidence and
commitment to teamwork after they apply what they learned in a real classroom. The findings
will potentially point to any obstacles that are beyond teachers’ control and so require
organizational support.
Follow-up With the Supervisors of Participants
After the workshop, participants will return to their worksite, where their direct
supervisor’s monitoring and support will help reinforce the implementation of DI. The fourth
questionnaire (Appendix F) is for participants’ direct supervisors. As shown in Table 13, critical
behaviors should be applied and observed to indicate the effectiveness of the program and the
implementation of the knowledge and skills learned. In order to do this, evidence of effective
implementation will be gathered from weekly teaching reports and teacher meetings and from
students’ ISQ and ESQ inputs.
Follow-up With Organizational Leadership
The implementation of DI by first-line teachers is essential, but the support of direct
supervisors is also crucial. The fifth questionnaire (Appendix G) ensures that direct supervisors
support the DI program. This survey is taken by the leadership in the organization responsible for
those direct supervisors. As described in Table 6, the required drivers from direct supervisors are
1) promoting teamwork among teachers and departments, 2) providing the necessary resources
of a professional-development platform, time, and supplies, 3) empowering first-line teachers,

123
and 4) tracking teachers’ reports, meetings, ISQs, and ESQs. Therefore, the items in the survey
focus on progress in these areas.
After ensuring the implementation of the program, organizational leaders will want to
measure the effectiveness and long-term influences of the program. The sixth questionnaire
(Appendix H) serves this purpose. If direct supervisors provide the required drivers detailed in
Table 6, and teachers act on the critical behaviors suggested in Table 13, then organizational
leadership should observe the internal and external outcomes and leading indicators listed in
Table 12. The survey in Appendix H helps leaders determine the achievement of these outcomes.
Further Research
There are numerous areas of future research to improve foreign language instruction for
adult learners. While this study is primarily limited to the differentiated-instruction teaching
approach, future research could address autonomous learning, communicative language teaching,
content-based instruction, task-based language teaching, or cooperative language learning.
Additionally, while the three leader interviews in this study offer insights into potential
new ideas for promoting differentiated instruction more effectively, these are not extensive
enough to exhaust the list. There needs to be additional research comparing student performance
with and without teachers applying DI. Such a comparison could feature two classes of randomly
selected students, with teachers in the first class strictly following the textbook with no
differentiation or assistance, while teachers in the second modify the textbook material and
provide students with additional assistance when needed. The scope of such research could also
extend to teachers with different levels of experience.
Finally, one of the required drivers in Table 14, “Implementing an effective
accountability system,” requires top leadership support and action, and shareholders outside of
the organization will be required to ensure implementation. Implementing an effective

124
accountability system is beyond the scope of the current study. However, if this required driver is
not satisfied, teachers’ critical behavior might not be achieved. According to the interview data,
the present accountability system at WCFLI is a major reason that teachers do not invest in
implementing differentiated instruction in their classrooms. The internal outcomes might
therefore not be achieved as expected, leading to a diminished evaluation of the program.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational resources to reach the organizational performance goal at
WCFLI related to adult foreign language acquisition. The study was conducted through
qualitative interviews with participating stakeholders, including twelve experienced foreign-
language teachers at WCFLI and three school leaders. An analysis of the current assets and
continuing knowledge, motivational, and organizational needs of foreign language teachers at the
school resulted in four emerging themes. Promoting differentiated instruction throughout the
organization with a long-term plan is intended to demonstrate commitment to achieving the
organizational goals. After the interviews were completed, the various KMO influencers were
presented with suggestions from the interviewed teachers and leaders. This research was then
used to develop an action plan at WCFLI, with research-based solutions and an implementation
and evaluation plan based on Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation (2016).
Current teaching approaches do not necessarily meet the vision of the organization. Even
though some students are achieving high performance, they are stressed and teachers are
exhausted. Moreover, results are not consistent, leaving some students to face the challenges of
graduation and their future job. However, differentiated instruction offers an approach for
organizing teaching systematically among all instructors and classrooms. Differentiated
instruction provides teachers with the power to take control of their teaching plans and to give

125
students additional attention and assistance. By the end of October 2021 there should be an
effective mechanism at WCFLI to improve teamwork among teachers and between departments.
Further, the organization will implement an effective accountability system that is transparent to
all teachers and supervisors. This will support teachers in applying high-quality differentiated-
instruction skills through the safe professional-development platform built by the organization.
With these changes, students at WCFLI will achieve its organizational goal of 2+/2+/2 and more.
As a leading institute in foreign-language education in the U.S., WCFLI offers an
example of how to support the needs of language teachers in helping adult foreign-language
learners achieve higher proficiency levels. This example could also potentially be generalized to
other adult foreign-language institutions. The needs in knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational support of teachers at other schools could be the same as those of teachers at
WCFLI. Therefore, the recommendations suggested in this study to close these gaps at WCFLI
could be served as possible solutions for other foreign-language schools in helping adult
language learners achieve higher proficiency levels.

126
References
Agarwal, S., & Adjirackor, T. (2016). Impact of teamwork on organizational productivity in
some selected basic schools in the Accra metropolitan assembly. European Journal of
Business, Economics and Accountancy, 4(6), 40-52.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual review of psychology, 60, 451-474.
Ahmad, S., & Rao, C. (2012). Does it work? Implementing communicative language teaching
approach in EFL context. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(12), 28-35.
Alavinia, P., & Sadeghi, T. (2013). The impact of differentiated task-based instruction via
heeding learning styles on EFL learners’ feasible proficiency gains. 3L: Language,
Linguistics, and Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies,
19, 75–91.
Alexander, Y. (2020). The perception of the English Department students on the contribution of
the lecturers’ feedback on their paragraph writing assignment. Unpublished manuscript,
Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/.
Anderman, E. M., Eseplage, D. L., Reddy, L. A., McMahon, S. D., Martinez, A., Lane, K. L., ...
& Paul, N. (2018). Teachers’ reactions to experiences of violence: An attributional
analysis. Social psychology of education, 21(3), 621-653.
Baecher, L., Artigliere, M., Patterson, D., & Spatzer, A. (2012). Differentiated Instruction for
English Language Learners as “Variations on a Theme.” Middle School Journal (J3),
43(3), 14–21.

127
Bartell, T., Floden, R., & Richmond, G. (2018). What Data and Measures Should Inform
Teacher Preparation? Reclaiming Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(5),
426–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118797326
Belboukhaddaoui, I., & van Ginkel, S. (2019). Fostering oral presentation skills by the timing of
feedback: an exploratory study in virtual reality. Research on Education and
Media, 11(1), 25-31.
Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole-school reform:
New American Schools after a decade . Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education.
Bird J., Bishop D.V., & Freeman N.H. (1995) Phonological awareness and literacy development
in children with expressive phonological impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research 38, 446-462.
Bjegovic-Mikanovic, V., Broniatowski, R., Byepu, S., & Laaser, U. (2019). Maternal and new-
born health policy indicators for low-resourced countries: The example of Liberia. South
Eastern European Journal of Public Health,12. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/SEEJPH-
2019-221
Boers, F., & Webb, S. (2018). Teaching and learning collocation in adult second and foreign
language learning. Language Teaching, 51(1), 77-89.
Bouguen, A. (2016). Adjusting content to individual student needs: Further evidence from an in-
service teacher training program. Economics of Education Review, 50(C), 90-112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2015.12.004
Brinton, D. (2007). Content-based instruction: Reflecting on its applicability to the teaching of
Korean. In 12th Annual Conference American Association of Teachers of Korean.
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (2018). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory,
research and practice. Routledge.

128
Brooks, F., & Darhower, M. (2014). It takes a department! A study of the culture of proficiency
in three successful foreign language teacher education programs. Foreign Language
Annals, 47(4), 592-613. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12118
Brooks, P., & Kempe, V. (2013). Individual differences in adult foreign language learning: The
mediating effect of metalinguistic awareness. Memory & Cognition, 41(2), 281-296. doi:
10.3758/s13421-012-0262-9
Brown, T. C. (2003). The effect of verbal self‐guidance training on collective efficacy and team
performance. Personnel Psychology, 56(4), 935-964.
Buhmann, A., Likely, F., & Geddes, D. (2018). Communication evaluation and measurement:
connecting research to practice. Journal of Communication Management.
Burke, B. (2013). Looking into a crystal ball: Is requiring high ‐stakes language proficiency tests
really going to improve world language education? Modern Language Journal, 97, 531-
534.
Cameron KS, Quinn RE (2006) Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the
competing values framework. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carpenter, D. (2015). School culture and leadership of professional learning
communities. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(5), 682-694.
Çelik, S. (2016). Setting new standards for in-service teacher training: A model for responsive
professional development in the context of English Language Teaching. In Dikilitas, K.,
Hakki Erten, I. (Eds.) Facilitating in-service teacher training for professional
development (300-310). IGI Global
Chamberlin, M., & Powers, R. (2010). The promise of differentiated instruction for enhancing
the mathematical understandings of college students. Teaching Mathematics and its
Applications, 29(3), 113-139.

129
Chambless, K. (2012). Teachers’ oral proficiency in the target language: Research on its role in
language teaching and learning. Foreign Language Annals, 45, S141-S162.
Chai, X. J., Berken, J. A., Barbeau, E. B., Soles, J., Callahan, M., Chen, J., & Klein, D. (2016).
Intrinsic functional connectivity in the adult brain and success in second-language
learning. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for
Neuroscience, 36(3), 755. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2234-15.2016
Cheng, A. (2006). Effects of differentiated curriculum and instruction on Taiwanese EFL
students' motivation, anxiety and interest (Order No. 3238301). Available from
Dissertations & Theses @ University of Southern California; ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic. (304968996). Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/304968996?accountid=14749
Chowdhury, M. R. (2003). International TESOL training and EFL contexts: The cultural
disillusionment factor. Australian Journal of Education, 47(3), 283-302.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research into Results: A Guide to Selecting the Right
Performance Solutions. IAP.
Clifford, R. T., & Fischer, D. C. (1990). Foreign language needs in the U.S. government. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 511(1), 109-121. doi:
10.1177/0002716290511001009
Cochran-Smith, M., Carney, M., Keefe, E., Burton, S., Wen-Chia Chang, Fernandez, M., …
Baker, M. (2018). Reclaiming accountability in teacher education. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.

130
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts
of reading, writing, and mathematics. Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in
honor of Robert Glaser, 18, 32-42.
Connor, C.M. (2011). Child by instruction interactions: Language and literacy connections. In
S.B. Neuman & D.K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (3rd ed., pp.
256–275). New York: Guilford.
Cross, K. P. (1994). Adults as Learners: Increasing Participation and Facilitating Learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publ.
Cui, Gang. (2018). The English teaching research in China environment. Beijing: Tsinghua
University Press.
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2007). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse–
CLIL: empirische Untersuchungen zum Unterrichtsdiskurs. Frankfurt, Wien etc.: Peter
Lang.
Damari, R., Rivers, W., Brecht, R., Gardner, P., Pulupa, C., & Robinson, J. (2017). The Demand
for Multilingual Human Capital in the U.S. Labor Market. Foreign Language Annals,
50(1), 13–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12241
Darhower, M. (2014). Literary discussions and Advanced ‐Superior speaking functions in the
undergraduate language program. Hispania, 97, 396-412.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2015). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to
equity will determine our future. Teachers College Press.
Demirbolat, A. (2006). Education faculty students’ tendencies and beliefs about the teacher's role
in education: A case study in a Turkish University. Teaching and Teacher Education,
22(8), 1068-1083.

131
DeNeve, D., Devos, G., & Tuytens, M. (2015). The importance of job resources and self-efficacy
for beginning teachers' professional learning in differentiated instruction. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 47, 30-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.tate.2014.12.003.
Denison, D., and Mishra, A. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness.
Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.2.204
Denler, H. (2009). Social Cognitive Theory. Education.com.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Devlin, K., & Pew Research Center. (2018). Only 20% of US kids study a language in school -
compared to 92% in Europe. Retrieved from
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/most-european-students-are-learning-a-
foreign-language-in-school-while-americans-lag
Dowd, A. C., & Shieh, L. T. (2013). Community college financing: Equity, efficiency, and
accountability. The NEA almanac of higher education, 37-65.
Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the
influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting
implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327-350.
Dyer, J., Gregersen, H., & Christensen, C. (2011). Innovator’s DNA: Mastering the five skills of
disruptive innovators. Harvard Business School Press.
Eccles, R. (2006). Efficacy and safety of over-the-counter analgesics in the treatment of common
cold and flu. Acute Pain, 8(4), 186–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acpain.2006.09.006
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive
training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74(3). doi: 311-327. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.
1990.tb01069.x

132
Elliot, A., & Harackiewicz, J. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic
motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3),
461–475. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.461
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for
professional development in education. Secondary lenses on learning participant book:
Team leadership for mathematics in middle and high schools, 313-344.
Engelen, A., Flatten, T. C., Thalmann, J., & Brettel, M. (2014). The effect of organizational
culture on entrepreneurial orientation: A comparison between Germany and
Thailand. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(4), 732-752.
doi:10.1111/jsbm.12052
Fend, H. (2008). Schule Gestalten [Designing schools]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fü r
Sozialwissenschaften.
Fidishun, D. (2000). Teaching adult students to use computerized resources: Utilizing Lawler's
keys to adult learning to make instruction more effective. Information technology and
libraries, 19(3), 157-157.
Fogarty, J. R., & Pete, M. B. (2011). Supporting differentiated instruction: A professional
learning communities approach. Bloomington, NJ: Solution Tree Press.
Fortwengel, J., & Jackson, G. (2016). Legitimizing the apprenticeship practice in a distant
environment: Institutional entrepreneurship through inter-organizational
networks. Journal of World Business, 51(6), 895-909.
Fotheringham, J. (2018, September 25). About Language Mastery. Retrieved from
https://l2mastery.com/about-language-mastery/
Fox, J., & Hoffman, W. (2011). The differentiated instruction book of lists. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

133
Francisco, J., Nicoll, G., & Trautmann, M. (1998). Integrating multiple teaching methods into a
general chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(2), 210–213.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ed075p210
Fraser, A. (2015). Goal orientation theory. REIQ Journal, (May 2015), 18.
Friedman, A. (2015, May 11). America's Lacking Language Skills. Retrieved from
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/filling-americas-language-
education-potholes/392876/
Gai, F. (2014). The application of autonomous learning to fostering cross-cultural
communication competence. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(6), 1291-1295.
doi:10.4304/tpls.4.6.1291-1295
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1),
45-56.
Ghaye, T. (2010). In what ways can reflective practices enhance human flourishing? Reflective
Practice, 11(1), 1-7. doi:10.1080/14623940903525132
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Glisan, E. (2013). On keeping the target language in language teaching: A bottom ‐up effort to
protect the public and students. Modern Language Journal, 97, 541-544.
Glisan, E., Swender, E., & Surface, E. (2013). Oral proficiency standards and foreign language
teacher candidates: Current findings and future research directions. Foreign Language
Annals, 46, 264-289.
Goddard, Y. L., Neumerski, C. M., Goddard, R. D., Salloum, S. J., & Berebitsky, D. (2010). A
multilevel exploratory study of the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of

134
principals’ instructional support and group norms for instruction in elementary schools.
Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 336-357.
Goldenberg, C., & Sullivan, J. (1994). Making Change Happen in a Language Minority School:
A Search for Coherence. Retrieved from http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4sf6j3g4
Government and foreign language teaching, the. (1942). The German Quarterly, 15, 218.
Guay, F., Roy, A., & Valois, P. (2017). Teacher structure as a predictor of students' perceived
competence and autonomous motivation: The moderating role of differentiated
instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 224-240.
doi:10.1111/bjep.12146
Gullberg, M., Roberts, L., Dimroth, C., Veroude, K., & Indefrey, P. (2010). Adult language
learning after minimal exposure to an unknown natural language. Language Learning,
60, 5-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010. 00598.x
Hazel, S., & Svennevig, J. (2018). Multilingual workplaces–Interactional dynamics of the
contemporary international workforce. Journal of Pragmatics, 126, 1-9.
Heacox, D. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach
all learners. Golden Valley, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. R. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of
Southern California Urban Education, 17-19.
Herold, W. (1977). Gaps in the preparation of foreign language teachers. Foreign Language
Annals, 10(6), 617. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1977.tb03038.x
Herron, C. (1982). Who should study a foreign language? The myth of elitism. Foreign
Language Annals, 15(6), 441-449.

135
Hibbert, A., Billaut, F., Varley, M., & Polman, R. (2018). Goal Orientation and the Presence of
Competitors Influence Cycling Performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1212.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01212
Hinkel, E. (Ed.). (2011). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol.
2). Routledge.
Hinton, K. A. (2016). Call it what it is: Monolingual education in US schools. Critical Inquiry in
Language Studies, 13(1), 20-45.
Hoggan, C. D. (2016). Transformative learning as a metatheory: Definition, criteria, and
typology. Adult Education Quarterly, 66(1), 57-75.
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Is Related to
Instructional Quality: A Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology,
105(3), 774–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032198
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2014). Predicting teachers’ instructional behaviors:
The interplay between self-efficacy and intrinsic needs. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 39(2), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.02.001
Huhn, C. (2012). In search of innovation: Research on effective models of foreign language
teacher preparation. Foreign Language Annals, 45, S163-S183.
Inhelder, D., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence
(A. Parsons & S. Milgram, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Interagency Language Roundtable Language Skill Level Description (2018, June 4). Retrieved
from http://www.govtilr.org/Skills/ILRscale2.htm
Interview with Everette Jordan, Senior Associate, Government and Private Sector Relations,
National Foreign Language Center. (2002). Foreign Language Annals, 35(2), 259-260.
10.1111/j.1944-9720. 2002.tb03170.x

136
Iurea, C., Neacsu, I., Safta, C. G., & Suditu, M. (2011). The study of the relation between the
teaching methods and the learning styles–The impact upon the students’ academic
conduct. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 256-260.
Jain, M. P. (1969). Error analysis of an Indian English corpus. Unpublished
manuscript, University of Edinburgh.
Jiang, N. (2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language
learning. Language Learning, 57(1), 1-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007. 00397.x
Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (2011). Re-evaluating traditional approaches to second language teaching
and learning. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 2, 558-
575.
Johnson, D. W. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1250 N. Pitt St., Alexandria, VA 22314.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2017). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches (Sixth edition.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Kam, C. M., Greenberg, M. T., & Walls, C. T. (2003). Examining the role of implementation
quality in school-based prevention using the PATHS curriculum. Prevention
Science, 4(1), 55-63.
Kessler, G., & Hubbard, P. (2017). Language teacher education and technology. The handbook
of technology and second language teaching and learning, 278-292.
Khan, I. U., Hasnain, S. A., Ullah, S., & Khalid, A. (2018). Impact of transformational
leadership on employee's job satisfaction and well-being through team efficacy in
PMBMC. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 8(1), 327-339.

137
Kilday, J., Lenser, M., & Miller, A. (2016). Considering students in teachers’ self-efficacy:
Examination of a scale for student-oriented teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education,
56, 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.025
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kozar, O. (2010). Towards Better Group Work: Seeing the Difference between Cooperation and
Collaboration. In English Teaching Forum (Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 16-23). US Department of
State. Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Office of English Language Programs,
SA-5, 2200 C Street NW 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20037.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Individual Identity, Cultural Globalization, and Teaching English as
an International Language: The Case for an Epistemic Break: B. Kumaravadivelu.
In Principles and practices for teaching English as an international language (pp. 17-
35). Routledge.
Lambert, R. D. (1992). Foreign Language Planning in the United States. NFLC Occasional
Papers.
Language Education by Region. (2018, July 07). Retrieved from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_education_by_region
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication
(Vol. 4). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Lim, H. L. (2015). What makes them stay and go?: Best practices for engaging gen Y female
professionals in the critical Arabian Gulf petroleum industry. In Handbook of Research

138
on Recent Developments in Materials Science and Corrosion Engineering Education (pp.
416-440). IGI Global.
Locke, T., & Johnston, M. (2016). Developing an individual and collective self-efficacy scale for
the teaching of writing in high schools. Assessing Writing, 28, 1-14.
Long, M. (2003). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In C. Doughty &
M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 487–535).
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced
approach (Vol. 18). John Benjamins Publishing.
Magnan, S., Murphy, D., & Sahakyan, N. (2014). Introduction: Goals of collegiate learners and
the standards for foreign language learning. Modern Language Journal, 98, 1-11.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mayer, N. L., Cosman, M. A., Dawson, R. C., & Bennion, H. B. (2011). U.S. Patent No.
7,872,647. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2006). The effect of general relevance
instructions on shallow and deeper learning and reading time. The Journal of
Experimental Education, 74(4), 291-310.
McGroarty, M. (1989). The benefits of cooperative learning arrangements in second language
instruction. NABE journal, 13(2), 127-143.
McQuarrie, L. M., & McRae, P. (2010). A provincial perspective on differentiated instruction:
The alberta initiative for school improvement (AISI). Journal of Applied Research on
Learning, 3(4), 1-18.

139
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2017). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Vancouver, B.C.: Langara College.
Miller, A., Ramirez, E., & Murdock, T. (2017). The influence of teachers’ self-efficacy on
perceptions: Perceived teacher competence and respect and student effort and
achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 260–269.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.008
Mitchell, C. (2017). Foreign language; "national K-12 foreign language enrollment survey
report”. (brief article). Education Week, 36(34), 5.
Mohanna, K., Chambers, R., & Wall, D. (2016). Your teaching style: A practical guide to
understanding, developing and improving. CRC Press.
Moon, J. (2000). Reflection in learning and professional development. London: Kogan Page.
Moon, S., Xu, S., Hou, L., Wu, C., Wang, X., & Tam, V. (2018). RFID-Aided Tracking System
to Improve Work Efficiency of Scaffold Supplier: Stock Management in Australasian
Supply Chain. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(2).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001432
Moore, K. D. (2005). Effective instructional strategies: From theory to practice. California: Sage
Publication.
Morgan, T., Shoghli, O., Chen, D., & Mayo, G. (2018). Manpower and Efficiency Study of the
Manns Harbor Shipyard through Data Envelopment Analysis (ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/2154435325/
News and Notes. (1942). The German Quarterly, 15(4), 218-221. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/400204
Niall McLaughlin.(Bishop Edward King Chapel, Niall McLaughlin Architects)(Stirling Prize
2013)(Interview). (2013). Architects’ Journal, 238(10), 90–96.

140
Nicolaidis, K., Mattheoudakis, M. (2008). Utopia vs. reality: The effectiveness of in-service
training courses for EFL teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), 279-
292.
Nieto, D. (2009). A brief history of bilingual education in the United States. Urban Ed Journal,
61, 61-65.
Olsen, R. E. W. B., & Kagan, S. (1992). About cooperative learning. Cooperative language
learning: A teacher’s resource book, 1-30.
Opdenakker, M. C., & Van Damme, J. (2007). Do school context, student composition and
school leadership affect school practice and outcomes in secondary education? British
Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 179-206.
Ortega, D. P., Cabrera, J. M., & Benalcázar, J.,V. (2018). Differentiating instruction in the
language learning classroom: Theoretical considerations and practical
applications. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(6), 1220-1228.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.17507/jltr.0906.11
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-Efficacy Theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Pandey, A., & Karve, S. (2017). Understanding the Relationship of Team Roles and
Communication in Team Tasks. International Journal of Business Insights &
Transformation, 11(1).
Paran, A. (2013). [Review of CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning.(Book review)].
ELT Journal, 67(1), 137–141. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs072
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks:
SAGE Publications.

141
Pavlenko, A. (2003). “Language of the Enemy”: Foreign Language Education and National
Identity. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 6(5), 313–331.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050308667789
Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2014). Introduction to emotions in education.
In International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 11-20). Routledge.
Pring-Mill, D. (2018, March 04). Why Hasn't AI Mastered Language Translation? Retrieved
from https://singularityhub.com/2018/03/04/why-hasnt-ai-mastered-language-
translation/#sm.000nz4zv513ecf6ywmh2pt3b5rvhe
Pufahl, I., & Rhodes, N. (2011). Foreign Language Instruction in U.S. Schools: Results of a
National Survey of Elementary and Secondary Schools. Foreign Language Annals, 44(2),
258–288. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2011.01130.x
Qi, Z., Beach, S. D., Finn, A. S., Minas, J., Goetz, C., Chan, B., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2017).
Native-language N400 and P600 predict dissociable language-learning abilities in
adults. Neuropsychologia, 98, 177-191. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.10.005
Quinn, R. E., & J. Rohrbaugh (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Toward a
competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science 29(3), 363-
377.
Ricketts, M. A. (2014). The lived experiences of teachers in implementing differentiated
instruction in the inclusive classroom (Order No. 3645551). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest One Academic; ProQuest One Literature.
(1627154994). Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1627154994?accountid=14749
Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and
backward design. Relc Journal, 44(1), 5-33.

142
Richards, J. C., & Burns, A. (Eds.). (2012). The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in
second language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching.
Cambridge university press.
Rogers, K. M. A. (2009). A preliminary investigation and analysis of student learning style
preferences in further and higher education. Journal of Further and Higher
Education, 33(1), 13-21.
Roy, A., Guay, F., & Valois, P. (2013). Teaching to address diverse learning needs:
Development and validation of a differentiated instruction scale. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 17(11), 1186-1204. doi:10.1080/13603116.2012.743604
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Saito, K. (2017). Effects of sound, vocabulary, and grammar learning aptitude on adult second
language speech attainment in foreign language classroom. Language Learning: A
Journal of Research in Language Studies, 67(3), 665-693. doi: 10.1111/lang.12244
Salgür, S. (2014). Importance of mentoring in teacher training. Euromentor Journal, 5(2), 46-51.
Schiefele, U., & Schaffner, E. (2015). Teacher interests, mastery goals, and self-efficacy as
predictors of instructional practices and student motivation. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 42, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.005
Schmiedel T, vom Brocke J, Recker J. (2013). Which cultural values matter to business process
management? Results from a global Delphi study. Business Process Management
Journal, 19(2), 292-317.

143
Schneider, W. (1995). Productivity improvement through cultural focus. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 47(1), 3-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//1061-4087.47.1.3
Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner-how professionals think in action. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Schraw, G. (2009). Measuring metacognitive judgments. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C.
Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 415–429). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Selfridge R. J. & Sokolik S. L. (1975). A comprehensive view of organizational development.
MSU Business Topics 23(1), 46-61.
Shen, W., Choi, B., Lee, S., & Tang, W. (2016). Effects of Formal Practices and Teamwork on
Interface Management Performance in Large-Scale Construction Projects.
In Construction Research Congress 2018 (pp. 356-366).
Shenton, A. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.
Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education
and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to
STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 13.
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-
189.
Slavoff, G. R., & Johnson, J. S. (1995). The effects of age on the rate of learning a second
language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 1-16.
Smit, R., & Humpert, W. (2012). Differentiated Instruction in Small Schools. Teaching and
Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 28(8), 1152–
1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.003

144
Sokolik, M. E. (1990). Learning without rules: PDP and a resolution of the adult language
learning paradox. TESOL Quarterly, 24(4), 685-96. doi: 10.2307/3587115
Speciale, G., Ellis, N. C., & Bywater, T. (2004). Phonological sequence learning and short-term
store capacity determine second language vocabulary acquisition. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 25, 293-321.
Starnes, B. J., Truhon, S. A., & McCarthy, V. (2010). Organizational trust: employee-employer
relationships. A Primer on Organizational Trust.
Stein-Smith, K. (2016). A Brief History of Foreign Language Learning in the United States. In
the US Foreign Language Deficit (pp. 49-57). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Suprayogi, M. N., & Valcke, M. (2016). Differentiated instruction in primary schools:
Implementation and challenges in Indonesia. PONTE, 72(6), 2-18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.21506/j.ponte.2016.6.1.
Suprayogi, M., Valcke, M., & Godwin, R. (2017). Teachers and their implementation of
differentiated instruction in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67(C), 291–
301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.020
Tajgozari, M., & Alimorad, Z. (2019). Iranian EFL students’ perceptions of criteria for assessing
students’ written performance. Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(1), 2-9.
Tasa, K., Taggar, S., & Seijts, G. H. (2007). The development of collective efficacy in teams: a
multilevel and longitudinal perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 17.
Taylor, N., & Thelin, J. (2015). Rise of the administrator in higher education: Focus on
professionalization of the registrar at the University of Kentucky from 1910 to 1937.
ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1691127757/

145
Tedick, D. (2013). Embracing proficiency and program standards and rising to the challenge: A
response to Burke. Modern Language Journal, 97, 535-538.
The End of Foreign Language Education in US Schools. (2018, January 12). Retrieved from
https://acei-global.blog/2018/01/12/the-end-of-foreign-language-education-in-us-schools/
The History of Foreign Language Education in the United States timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/the-history-of-foreign-language-education-in-the-
united-states
Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. (2012). CRM in Organizational Structure Design. Procedia
Technology, 1(C), 579–582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2012.02.126
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom.
Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD.
Tschirner, E. (2016). Listening and Reading Proficiency Levels of College Students. Foreign
Language Annals, 49(2), 201–223. doi:10.1111/flan.12198
Tulbure, C. (2011). Differentiated instruction for pre-service teachers: An experimental
investigation. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 448-452.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.088
Tulbure, C. (2012). Investigating the Relationships between Teaching Strategies and Learning
Styles in Higher Education. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(1), 65-74.
Tulbure, C. (2013). The effects of differentiated approach in higher education: An experimental
investigation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 76, 832-836.
Van den Branden, K. (2009). Task-based language teaching: A reader (Vol. 1). John Benjamins
Publishing Company; Amsterdam.

146
Van Gorp, K., & Bogaert, N. (2006). Developing language tasks for primary and secondary
education. Task-based language education: From theory to practice, 76-105.
Vancouver, J., & Purl, J. (2017). A computational model of self-efficacy’s various effects on
performance: moving the debate forward.(Author abstract). Journal of Applied
Psychology, 102(4), 599–616. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000177
Vasilopoulos, G. (2008). Adapting communicative language instruction in Korean
universities. The Internet TESOL Journal, 14(8).
Vygotskij, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wan, S. W.-Y. (2015). Differentiated instruction: Hong Kong prospective teachers' teaching
efficacy and beliefs. Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 148-176.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1055435
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement (pp. 1-19). Mid-
continent Research for Education and Learning.
Watts ‐Taffe, S., (Barbara) Laster, B. P., Broach, L., Marinak, B., Mcdonald Connor, C., &
Walker ‐Dalhouse, D. (2012). Differentiated instruction: Making informed teacher
decisions. Reading Teacher, 66(4), 303-314. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01126
Watson, J., & Wolfel, R. (2015). The Intersection of Language and Culture in Study Abroad:
Assessment and Analysis of Study Abroad Outcomes. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary
Journal of Study Abroad, 25, 57–72.
Weiner, B. (1991). Metaphors in Motivation and Attribution. American Psychologist, 46(9),
921–930. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.9.921

147
Whipple, K. A. (2012). Differentiated instruction: A survey study of teacher understanding and
implementation in a southeast Massachusetts school district (Unpublished Doctoral
Theses). Massachusetts: Northeastern University.
Wiggins, G. (2013). How Good Is Good Enough? Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec13/vol71/num04/How-
Good-Is-Good-Enough¢.aspx
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Grammatical, Situational and Notional Syllabuses.
Wills, D., & Willis, J., 2007. Doing Task-Based Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. (2016). Teacher Self-Efficacy and Its Effects on Classroom Processes,
Student Academic Adjustment, and Teacher Well-Being: A Synthesis of 40 Years of
Research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801

148
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol for Foreign Language Teachers
“Thank you very much for agreeing to talk to me today. Your perspectives are valuable to
me as a part of this study being conducted for my doctoral work at USC focused on improving
adult foreign language acquisition. First of all, I want to make sure that you are here voluntarily.
You are, yes?” (If yes), “I’m going to take a few notes while we talk to get your ideas down, and
I would also like to record our conversation. This way, I can go back to what you said if I need
to. Is this okay with you?” “To protect our organization, I will use a pseudonym. To protect your
privacy and rights, all the data will be kept confidential and password secured and there will be
no identifying information attached to the data (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). You can refuse to answer
any question if you don’t want to, and you can withdraw from the interview and study any time
you want. After I organize the data from this interview, I will share it with you to make sure I
captured your ideas correctly (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Do you have any questions before we
start?” I will be asking you questions about your experiences as an adult foreign language
teacher and your needs to help adult students reach a higher level of proficiency in a foreign
language.”
Interview Questions
Lead-in:
1. “Based on your experience, what are some of the most efficient teaching approaches to
help adult language learners reach high proficiency level?”
2. “Throughout your teaching experience, how did you overcome the challenges of the
diversity of students’ language learning?” - (address the Knowledge [factual/procedure]
element, which is from the framework I adapted for my dissertation)

149
Transitional sentences: “We’ve been talking about students’ diversity and their different
needs, so…”
3. What does differentiated instruction mean to you?- (address the Knowledge [factual]
element)
4. “To what extent do you feel comfortable/confident conducting differentiated instruction
to meet this diversity in needs?”- (address the Motivation [self-efficacy] element).
Probe: What makes you more or less confident here?
5. Can you tell me step by step how do you use DI in your instruction? For example,
counseling, homework, and one on one.- (address the Knowledge [procedure] element).
Probe: What were students’ reaction/feedback when you conducted DI?
Probe: Did you students write anything about the instructor tailored their needs and know
their strengths and weaknesses in the ESQ/ISQ?
Transitional sentences: “Thank you for sharing those insightful ideas!”
6. “In general, How do you know when your teaching is effective?” -(address the
Knowledge [metacognitive] element)
Transitional sentences: “In addition to the things you just mentioned…”
7. “To what extent do you think applying differentiated instruction in your teaching
approaches impacts students learning to achieve higher proficiency?”- (address the
Motivation [attribution] element)
Probe: Do you think that DI will negatively affect the learning outcome? Why?
Transitional sentences: “A minute ago we briefly discussed about the support you need to
conduct DI, one of them is…”

150
8. “What obstacles have you encountered when you were trying to practice DI that is out of
your control? For example, manpower, time, trainings and so on.” -(address the
Organizational cultural [model] element)
9. “What resources (e.g. time, incentives, compensation, etc.), if any, would you want the
organization to provide to apply DI effectively?”- (address the Organizational cultural
[setting] element)
Probe: “Which, if any, of these resources are now offered by the organization?”- (address
the Organizational cultural [setting] element)
Transitional sentence: “Yes, that would be very helpful!”
10. “Do you have anything to add about the topics we mentioned but did not explicitly
discuss?”

151
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol for Language-School Leaders
“Thank you very much for agreeing to talk to me today. Your perspectives are valuable to
me as a part of this study being conducted for my doctoral work at University of Southern
California (USC) focused on improving adult foreign language acquisition. I will be asking you
questions about your experiences as a leader in an adult foreign language training organization to
help adult students reach a higher level of proficiency in a foreign language. This interview
might take 40-60 minutes. First of all, I want to make sure that you are here voluntarily. You are,
yes?” (If yes), “I’m going to take a few notes while we talk to get your ideas down, and I would
also like to record our conversation. This way, I can go back to what you said if I need to. Is this
okay with you?” “To protect our organization, I will use a pseudonym. To protect your privacy
and rights, all the data will be kept confidential and password secured and there will be no
identifying information attached to the data (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). You can refuse to answer
any question if you don’t want to, and you can withdraw from the interview and study any time
you want. After I organize the data from this interview, I will share it with you to make sure I
captured your ideas correctly (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Do you have any questions before we
start?”
Interview Questions for Leaders
Lead-in:
1. “Based on your experience, what are some of the most efficient teaching approaches to
help adult language learners reach high proficiency level?” (Knowledge [metacognitive])
2. “Throughout your experience, how will you suggest your teachers to overcome the
challenges of the diversity of students’ language learning?” - (address the Knowledge
[factual/procedure] element, which is from the framework I adapted for my dissertation)

152
3. “What does differentiated instruction mean to you?” – (Knowledge [factual])
4. “Do you think our teachers are capable to apply DI effectively in the classroom?” –
(Motivation [self-efficacy])
Prob: What do you think makes them more or less confident here?
5. “Can you tell me step by step how do you think differentiated instruction should be
applied in our institution?” – (Knowledge [procedure])
Probe: What were students’ reaction/feedback when teacher conducted DI? For example,
did students write anything about the instructor tailored their needs and know their
strengths and weaknesses in the ESQ/ISQ?
6. “In general, How do you know when your teachers’ teaching is effective?” -(address the
Knowledge [metacognitive] element)
7. “Do you think applying DI will help our students reach higher proficiency level?” –
(Motivation [attribution])
Probe: Do you think that DI will negatively affect the learning outcome? Why?
8. “What are the challenges in applying DI in our institute?” (Knowledge/Motivation [self-
efficacy]/Organizational cultural [model])
Prob: “How do you suggest to overcome the challenges in applying DI in the
organization?”
9. “What resources (e.g. time, incentives, compensation, etc.), if any, would you want the
organization to provide to apply DI effectively?”- (address the Organizational cultural
[setting] element)
Probe: “Which, if any, of these resources are now offered by the organization?”- (address
the Organizational cultural [setting] element)

153
10. “Do you have anything to add about the topics we mentioned but did not explicitly
discuss?”

154
Appendix C
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Pre-Course Survey
Thank you for taking part in this survey. Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the
Differentiated Instruction Course. This survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be
assured that all your responses will be kept confidential.
Course date:
Please choose the option that best describes your opinion.

1. (Relevance) This workshop is relevant in supporting my work to help students reach the
new organizational goal of 2+/2+/2.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. (Engagement) I commit to accomplishing all the tasks in this program.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. (Confidence) I am confident in my ability to conduct differentiated instruction
effectively.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. (Procedural) Please list the steps you would take to conduct differentiated instruction.
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

155

5. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

156
Appendix D
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Post-Course Survey
Thank you for taking part in this survey. Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the
Differentiated Instruction Course. This survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be
assured that all your responses will be kept confidential.
Course date:
Your name (optional):
Facilitators’ names:
Please choose the option that best describes your opinion.
1. (Relevance) This workshop is relevant in supporting my work to help students reach the
new organizational goal of 2+/2+/2.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. (Procedural) It was helpful to receive feedback from peers during the workshop.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. (Commitment) I see the benefit of working with my colleagues to conduct differentiated
instruction.
1 2 3 4☺
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

157
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. (Commitment) I will work with my colleagues to conduct differentiated instruction.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

5. (Procedural) The adaption activities designed in this workshop gave me opportunities to
develop a deeper understanding and real-life application of DI.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

6. (Confidence) I am confident in my ability to conduct differentiated instruction
effectively.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

158

7. (Procedural) Please list the steps you would take to conduct differentiated instruction.

8. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

159
Appendix E
Sample Differentiated Instruction Course Follow-Up Survey
Thank you for taking part in this survey. Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the
Differentiated Instruction Program. This survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be
assured that all your responses will be kept confidential.
Course date:
Your name (optional):
Facilitators’ names:
Please choose the option that best describes your opinion.
1. (Confidence) I am confident in my ability to conduct differentiated instruction
effectively.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. (Commitment) I see the benefit of working with my colleagues to conduct differentiated
instruction.
1 2 3 4☺
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3.
(Commitment) I will work with my colleagues to conduct differentiated instruction.
1 2 3 4☺
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

160
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. (Commitment) Please list the obstacles you have encountered when implementing DI in
your teaching context, and what you did to overcome these obstacles.

5. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

161
Appendix F
Sample Survey to Evaluate the Implementation of the Program
This survey is for the direct supervisors of program participants. Thank you for taking part in
this survey. Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the Differentiated Instruction
Course. This survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be assured that all your responses
will be kept confidential.
Regarding participant XXX, please choose the option that best describes your opinion.
1. Course participant/teacher XXX reports his/her implementation of DI in the weekly
reports.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. Course participant/teacher XXX has discussed or shared his/her implementation of DI
during the weekly meetings.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. Course participant/teacher XXX’s ISQ and ESQ indicate that he/she has been
implementing DI.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. Course participant/teacher XXX’s ISQ and ESQ indicate that the DI he/she has been
implementing is well-received by students.
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

162
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

5. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

163
Appendix G
Sample Survey to Monitor Support from Direct Supervisors
This survey is for the upper organizational leadership. Thank you for taking part in this survey.
Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the implementation of the Differentiated
Instruction Course. This survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be assured that all
your responses will be kept confidential.
Please choose the option that best describes your opinion. After the DI pilot program…
1. The number of sharing, modeling, or mentoring sessions regarding DI has increased in
your organization.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. The hosts/organizers of the sharing, modeling, or mentoring sessions regarding DI are
first-line teachers in your organization.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. The number of meetings hosted among teachers in the same department has increased.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. The number of meetings hosted among teachers from different departments has
increased.
1 2 3 4
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

164
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

5. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

165
Appendix H
Sample Survey to Evaluate the Long-term Effectiveness of the DI Program
This survey is for the upper organizational leadership. Thank you for taking part in this survey.
Your thoughts and opinions will help us improve the Differentiated Instruction Course. This
survey should take only 4-5 minutes to complete. Be assured that your responses will be kept
confidential.
Please choose the option that best describes your opinion. Three years after the DI pilot
program…
1. The number of students admitted to the organization has increased.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. The number of credits received from ACE has increased.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. (If a new effective accountability system has been implemented) The retention rate of
teachers has increased.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. (If a new effective accountability system has been implemented) The number of appeal
requests after annual appraisal has decreased.
Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

166
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

5. We welcome your additional comments or suggestions to improve future courses.

Many thanks for taking the time to respond to these questions. We wish you much
success in the future. Please stay in touch!

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Please use this space to explain your choice.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Sustained mentoring of early childhood education teachers: an innovation study

PDF

High attrition rate of preschool teachers in Hong Kong: an evaluation study

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Explicit instruction’s impact on the student achievement gap in K-12 English language learners

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM

PDF

Maximizing English learners' success in higher education with differentiated instruction

PDF

Using restorative practice community-building activities to meet the social-emotional needs of students

PDF

Teachers’ knowledge of gifted students and their perceptions of gifted services in public elementary schooling

PDF

Bridging the empathy gap: a mixed-method approach to evaluating teacher support in bullying prevention and intervention at an urban middle school in India

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

Modeling collaboration in K–12 teacher professional development

PDF

The use of differentiation in English medium instruction in Middle Eastern primary schools: a gap analysis

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Perception of alternative education teachers readiness to instruct English language learners: an evaluation study

PDF

Using task based writing instruction to provide differentiated instruction for English language learners

PDF

Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction

PDF

An analysis of online engagement of secondary teachers at high need schools during COVID-19 shutdowns

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

How effective professional development in differentiated instruction can save Hawaii's Catholic schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Zhou, Jing (author)

Core Title Foreign-language teachers' needs to achieve better results: the role of differentiated instruction

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 07/25/2020

Defense Date 06/01/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag differentiated instruction,Foreign Language Teaching,OAI-PMH Harvest,teachers' needs

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Krop, Cathy Sloane (committee chair), Datta, Monique Claire (committee member), Yuan, Rong (committee member)

Creator Email jingzhou1230@gmail.com,zhou652@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-342247

Unique identifier UC11666075

Identifier etd-ZhouJing-8756.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-342247 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ZhouJing-8756.pdf

Dmrecord 342247

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Zhou, Jing

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA