705 EEJ 12 (4) (2022) 705-727 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej The Implementation of Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan In The Practice of Teaching English For Adult Learners (TEAL) Course Mujib Abdillah, Rudi Hartono, Sri Wuli Fitriati 1. MTs. Tarbiyatus Shibyan, Pati, Indonesia 2. Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 09 May 2022 Approved 04 July 2022 Published 23 December 2022 ________________ Keywords: Implementation, Differentiated Instruction, the Practice of TEAL ____________________ Abstract __________________________________________________________________ Teaching preparation plays a vital role in teaching as the preparation which describes the elements will be used in teaching. It provides the basis for instructional focus and content. This research is aimed to describe the implementation of Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan for Junior High School Students in The Practice of Teaching English For Adult Learners (Teal) Course In The Second Half Of 2021 At Satya Wacana Christian University. This study was described from the perspective of qualitative research which employ a case study design which observed which focuses on analysing and describing the development of lesson plan, implementing lesson plan, Differentiated Instruction, and the practice of teaching in compatible Kurikulum Merdeka for Junior High School students in The Practice of TEAL course. The subject of this study were 8 student- teachers joining the Practice of TEAL course (microteaching) in the second half of 2021 at Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga who participated in the research. Whereas, the object of this study was the teacher –trainees designing a Differentiated Instruction lesson plan for Junior High School students and its implementation in the Practice of TEAL course. To collect the data, the researcher used questionnaires, written interview, and classroom observation and all of the items were analysed qualitatively using content analysis. The result of this research showed that first, teacher-trainees had fulfilled all the elements in designing the lesson plan (identity, Objective of Learning, Learning Material, Learning Activity, Selection of Media, Selection of Learning Source, and Evaluation). Secondly, teacher-trainees had made the differentiation of learning visible in their teaching, in terms of readiness, learning profile, and interest. In addition, the researcher found out that most teacher-trainees had made progress in the most frequently occurring weaknesses from the first teaching to the next four but however they found most difficulty in formulating the objective of the learning. Lastly, the research described the effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan since it facilitated supportive learning for heterogeneous learners. Correspondence Address: Margomulyo, Kec. Juwana. Pati Jawa Tengah 59185 Provinsi: Jawa Tengah, Indonesia E-mail: mujib19061992@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 706 INTRODUCTION A Successful teaching-learning process depends much on good planning. It is high time for teachers to design a good lesson plan to facilitate meaningful learning for students. According to Brown (2001), the lesson plan has a pervasive influence on successful teaching- learning activities. The planning process provides a framework to select goals, activities, and assignments relevant to knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Cooper, 1990). Moreover, the lesson plan offers appropriate assessments that make the planning process complete (Hunter, 1994, p. 87 cited by Jalongo et al., 2007, p. 42). To be an effective teacher, one needs to creatively synthesize his understanding of second language acquisition and language teaching pedagogy. He must accommodate the curriculum, and the teaching context to make a classroom that facilitates all the pieces of learning experiences fit together comes to reality. Research has found that lesson plan, the planning and organizing Lesson brings advantages to teachers because it enables them to structure the teaching/learning process that helps to avoid uncontrolled improvisation (Rodriguez, 2014). Further, Hammer (2006) stated that lesson planning is the art of combining several different elements into a coherent whole so that the lesson has an identity that students can recognize, work with and react to. It means that any lesson plan should encompass numeral fundamentals ranging from the time allocated, the students‟ level, the material used to finish up with the objectives, and the homework. In addition to Hammer, Woodward (2001) postulated that lesson planning is not only a piece of document. It is everything a teacher does when he is thinking of the next lesson such as visualizing, reading resources, or even staring at the ceiling. Meanwhile, Reed & Michaud (2010) believed that the lesson planning process allows teachers to evaluate their knowledge concerning the content of teaching. In Indonesia's teaching context, a lesson plan is a core activity for teachers. It is the basis of the three teacher responsibilities, i.e.: planning, implementing and assessing as stated in the Ministry of Education Regulation Number 21 Year 2016 about Standard of Content (planning), number 22 about Standard of Process (implementing), and number 23 about Standard of Assessment (assessing). In planning the lesson, teachers must be able to design meaningful learning for students which meets the requirements of 21st-century learners-- the ability to be critical, creative, communicative, and collaborative. The second responsibility is implementing the lesson plan. The lesson plan designed should be mirrored in the teaching which later is evaluated and improved in the next planning design. The third responsibility is assessing in which according to the decree assessment must reflect the lesson plan and teaching process which measured the three domains of affective, knowledge, and psychomotor. The launching of the “Merdeka” curriculum last December 2019 brings about a massive change in the lesson plan design. The implementation of Differentiated Instruction urges the teacher to facilitate students’ uniqueness in terms of interest, readiness, and learning profile into the learning process. The teacher must do the mapping to identify the students' learning needs and then designs the learning which fits the students’ diverse needs. Therefore, research in designing Differentiated Instruction lesson plans and its implementation in teaching practice is needed. The scope of this study is explaining how teacher-trainees design Differentiated Instruction lesson plans for Junior High School students and the implementation in the Practice of TEAL course at Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga. In addition, the study also considers the difficulties encountered by teacher trainees in designing the lesson plan and its implementation for Junior high School students and how teacher- trainees solve the obstacles. This study also focuses on explaining how teacher-trainees improve their lesson plan and teaching qualities in the Practice of TEAL course and the Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 707 effectiveness of the Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan for Junior High School Students. METHOD This study was described from the perspective of qualitative research which employed a case study design which observed the characteristics of an individual unit, that was a group (Cohen and Manion, 1994: 106). The study focuses on analysing and describing the development of lesson plan, implementing lesson plan, Differentiated Instruction, and the practice of teaching in compatible Kurikulum Merdeka. It is assumed that there were some difficulties faced by student-teachers in developing a Differentiated Instruction lesson plan, implementing the lesson plan, and improvements on their lesson plan and teaching performance. It is also assumed that the student- teachers had some alternative and creative ways of solving their obstacles in lesson planning and the implementation. Moreover, they also found out the obstacles as resources for improving their competencies in designing their lesson plan and the teaching practice in EFL classroom. The subject of this study were 8 student- teachers joining the Practice of TEAL course (microteaching) in the second half of 2021 at Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga who participated in the research. Whereas, the object of this study was the teacher –trainees designing a Differentiated Instruction lesson plan for Junior High School students and its implementation in the Practice of TEAL course. The unit analysis of this research was the student-teachers in The Practice of TEAL course in Satya Wacana Christian University, Salatiga as well as their teaching documents such as lesson plans, teaching videos, lecturer’s feedback, reflection journals, and evaluation items. In this study, I used questionnaires, written interviews, and classroom observation in collecting the data. The respondents were given a questionnaire which consisted of questions about lesson plan designing using the Differentiated Instruction approach and its implementation and then, I observed their practice of teaching. The respondents were interviewed to know whether there were problems in designing the Differentiated Instruction and implementing the lesson plan in the practice of teaching in the EFL classroom. They were also questioned on how they improve their lesson planning and teaching skills. The results were analysed to find out the compatibility with the Kurikulum Merdeka in general and Differentiated Instruction in particular. All of the items were analysed qualitatively using content analysis. Below is the table shows the instruments used in this study: This study used the theory of data collection procedures in qualitative research. Since it was a case study research, the data were analysed under principles of analysis method for case studies which is referred to as OTTR. It stands for “observe,” “think,” “test,” and “revise.” Analysis must be an iterative process whereby the initial observations are reflected upon and shape subsequent data collection. Observe -- initial observations are made and tentative hypotheses are formulated. Think -- consideration is made of what additional information must be collected to rule out alternative explanations or confirm initial hypotheses. Test -- additional information is collected through subsequent observation or review. Revise -- analysis of subsequent observations and review occurs, and initial hypotheses are re-examined. In this study, the data was presented in tables, charts, as well as description of the analysis. The description was elaborated in depth to reveal the findings of the study. For data validation, the researcher used Triangulation of Sources in which the data is examined in depth by various sources of data. The aim of this study was to provide data on the designing lesson plan and its implementation using a Differentiated Instruction approach under the scope of Kurikulum Merdeka. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The finding showed that the implementation of Differentiated Instruction Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 708 Lesson Plan for Junior High School students had driven some effectiveness in teaching, as follows: 1. The Teacher-trainees Design of Differentiated Instruction lesson plans The information from the rubric for Lesson Planning in the following table explained how teacher-trainees design the Differentiated Instruction lesson plans for Junior High School students in The Practice of TEAL Course: Table 1. Rubric for Lesson Plan Assessment No. Elements of Lesson Plan How Teacher-trainees Develop the Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan Percenta nge 1. Identity Complete 100 2. Objective of Learning Compatibility to the basic competency 87.5 Use operational Verbs 75.00 Covered three competencies (attitude, knowledge, and skills) 75.00 Covered the aspects of Objectives (Audience, Behavior, Condition, Degree) 87.5 Based on the students; needs/ ability 87.5 3. Learning Materials In accordance with basic competencies and Learning Objectives 62.5 In accordance with student needs/ability 87.5 arranged in an orderly, logical, systematic way, from easy to more complex/ difficult 75.00 Arranged in a clear, detailed and complete manner, containing facts, concepts, principles, relevant procedures 62.5 4. Learning Activity Used the Differentiated Instruction approach in accordance with KD 87.5 The steps or procedures for learning activities that are carried out in accordance with the Differentiated Instruction 87.5 Provide learning activities that include preliminary, core, and closing stages and are accompanied by time allocation in each stage. 100 Facilitated the learning steps which reflected active, creative, scientific and fun activities 87.5 Facilitated the learning steps which reflected the direct and concrete experience 75.00 5. Selection of Media The media were in accordance with the learning objectives, learning materials, class conditions, student needs, and paying attention to safety. 100 6. Selection of Learning Resources Included printed materials (books, handouts, etc.), electronic teaching materials (IT), and the surrounding environment, and paid attention to the relevance and updating. 100 7. Evaluation Includes aspects of attitude, knowledge, and skills 100 The methods/techniques are in accordance with the material, objectives, and/or competencies to be studied achieved (KD/indicator) 100 Including grids, tests/questions, answer keys, attitude instruments, skills instruments, and the scoring rubric 100 Planning/providing enrichment activities for students who have more abilities, planning/providing remedial for students. 100 From the table, the researcher concluded how the teacher-trainees develop the Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan. There are seven elements of the lesson plan that will be discussed in this section. They are (1) identity;(2) Objective of Learning; (3) Learning Material; (4) Learning Activity; (5) Selection of Media; (6) Selection of Learning Source; and (7) Evaluation. The findings showed that teacher-trainees did not find difficulty designing the required lesson plan. Almost all of them fulfill the criteria. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 709 The use of the Differentiated Instruction learning process was visible in almost all teaching, only one failed to facilitate the Differentiated Instruction learning process at the first teaching but he made improvements in the next teaching. Moreover, they also followed the steps or procedures for learning activities that are carried out in accordance with the Differentiated Instruction procedure of the approach used; only one failed to go with the procedures. In addition, all teacher-trainees provided learning activities which include preliminary, core, and closing stages and are accompanied by time allocation in each stage and facilitated active, creative, scientific and fun learning activities in accordance with the principles of Independent Learning; only one failed to fulfill all the aspects mentioned previously. They also facilitated the learning steps which reflected the direct and concrete experience. In the media usage, All teacher-trainees chose the media which were in accordance with the learning objectives, learning materials, class conditions, student needs, and paying attention to safety. All teacher-trainees included printed materials (books, handouts, etc.), electronic teaching materials (IT), and the surrounding environment, and paid attention to the relevance and updating. Some of them created a very well- designed PowerPoint presentation which really helped students’ comprehension. They also adapt the materials from websites like https://en.islcollective.com/ and adjust them to the student’s needs and levels. Most teacher- trainees created various handouts for the differentiation learning which were suitable for the students since they had considered the students’ needs and levels from the diagnostic test. Almost all teacher-trainees designed the assessment required that includes aspects of attitude, knowledge, and skills. They had fulfilled the requirements of evaluation that were suitable to the objectives and/or achieved competencies (KD/indicator). For the knowledge, those assessments include grids, and tests/questions, planning/providing enrichment activities for students who have more abilities, and planning/providing remedial for students who have fewer abilities. However, they did not provide answer keys. For the attitude and skill aspect, they provided instruments and the scoring rubric. The Teacher-trainees Implementation of their Differentiated Instruction lesson plans The information from the rubric for Teaching Practices in the following table explained how teacher-trainees design the Differentiated Instruction lesson plans for Junior High School students in The Practice of TEAL Course: Table 2. Rubric for Teaching Practices Assessment Characteristic of students in Differentiated instruction The implementation of Differentiated Instruction in the learning Process Differentiation by students’ readiness a. Teacher-trainees deliver a diagnostic test on the topic being discussed to determine the level of readiness b. Teacher-trainees make task directions more detailed and specific for some learners and more open for others c. Teacher-trainees use readiness workgroups d. Teacher-trainees provide materials in the primary language of foreign language learners e. Teacher-trainees provide readiness-based homework assignments for enrichment f. Teacher-trainees used scaffolding g. Teacher-trainees made vary pacing of student work h. Amount or kind of teachers help available Differentiation by students’ interest a. Teacher-trainees use both like-interest and mixed- interest workgroups. b. Teacher-trainees allow students to specialize in aspects of a topic that they find interesting and to share their findings with others. c. Teacher-trainees design tasks that require input from multiple areas of interest for successful completion. d. Teacher-trainees encourage students to design or participate in the design of some tasks. https://en.islcollective.com/ Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 710 Differentiation by students’ learning profile a. Teacher-trainees use the categorized-grouping in the learning process b. Teacher-trainees invite the students to learn based on their learning profile in the learning process. c. Teacher-trainees balance competitive, collegial, and independent work arrangements. d. Teacher-trainees develop; miss some part of correction and feedback activities that seek multiple perspectives on topics and issues. Based on the result as shown in the above table, the researcher found the three differentiation as suggested in “Kuriulum Merdeka” learning process conducted by the teacher-trainees as follows: Students’ readiness To identify the readiness of the students, the teacher-trainees designed a diagnostic test instrument based on the topic which was going to be discussed in their teaching and assigned the students to do the test via Google form. The result was analyzed and then was used by the teacher-trainees as the basis to develop the varied teaching materials in their lesson plan to be implemented in their teaching. In the teaching process, the teacher-trainee grouped the students based on their level of understanding (Upper, Middle, and Lower). The instructions were delivered in a more specific, detailed way and slower pace on how to complete the tasks so that the weak students will comprehend the instructions well and they did two ways in delivering the direction, i.e.: by direct explanation classically and visiting each student directly to ask which part they did not understand to guide them and explain more detailed about the lesson or direction about the tasks. They also used scaffolding and varied the pace of the student's work. The amount of teacher assistance was sufficient and more portions were given to the lower group. The language used was also varied and increased from the first to the next teaching to facilitate the heterogeneous levels of the students. 1. Students’ interest In some activities, teacher-trainees used both like-interest and mixed-group interest identified from the diagnostic test orally, conducted by the teacher-trainee in the class, about the topics which were going to be discussed. This differentiation was visible when designing the lesson plan, and teacher-trainees provided variations of topics for the learning. Students were given the freedom to choose the topic they liked and did the exercises on the given handout based on the topic chosen. They worked in their group and presented the result of the discussion in front of the class. Some teacher-trainees involved the students in designing the task by asking what they wanted to learn in their next meeting. This was becoming the basis for the teacher-trainees in designing the materials. The students followed the teachers to stick the task on the whiteboard until the students could accomplish it. The students also participated in designing the task given by teachers while working in a group. The teachers allowed them to prefer and give their opinion on which way the task would solve. Some students preferred to solve the tasks based on the example given by the teacher and some students preferred to do the task by modifying the example: it could be a short or long explanation. The teachers gave an example of solving the task or assignment then the students could decide in what version they want to do the task. Students’ learning profile Based on the findings of observation in the classroom, the implementation of differentiated instruction according to students’ learning profile were visible in some activities in the classroom. Teacher-trainees used categorized-grouping to decide the activities done in the classroom. Based on the diagnostic test, the teacher-trainees had the information about the students’ learning profile in terms of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. For visual groups, teacher-trainees provided pictures, ppt (PowerPoint presentation on the topic), or flashcards to present the material. For auditory groups, they provided videos or records related to the topics, and for the kinesthetic groups they Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 711 provided activities to create something in line with the topic. In the narrative class, a teacher- trainee assigned the students to do role play or drama and create a new song from the existing one by changing the lyrics according to the topic. In the learning process, teacher-trainees invited the students to learn based on their learning profile. In this stage, when a teacher- trainee decided the topic, he/ she invited the students to learn differently. In one classroom setting, the students learned in different ways. The visual group learned the materials by observing a picture in a contextual setting related to the topic or studying the PowerPoint presentation made by the teacher-trainee. In contrast to the visual group, the auditory group learned the materials by watching a video. They did it in the classroom or in the language laboratory or computer laboratory by putting on a headset so that they did not disturb the other students who were learning in a different way. Lastly, in the kinesthetic group, since they did creative work related to the topic, they did it outside the classroom (in the library or outdoors). In this way, they did not interfere with the other students' learning activities. Furthermore, teacher-trainees facilitate a collaborative and competitive atmosphere through group activity. Since the learning process was initiated by a diagnostic test, the students learned in their new community. They shared ideas here and worked out the assigned task together. The spirit of a collaboration facilitated students with practice of dealing with others in a mutualism relationship. The opportunity to compete among the students was equal. In the classroom, all the students could speak, give the question, or perform the task in group or independent, and in all of the activities, the teachers tried to engage all students to take part. The researcher found that all of the students have the same opportunity to ask their questions. Then, all of them also had the same chance to perform the tasks in order to compete with another group, did handwriting, and pointed out the pictures. The teachers organized the activities fairly. The Teacher-trainees Improvement of their lesson planning and teaching. The Teacher-trainees Improvement of their lesson planning. The finding was derived from the analysis of the teacher-trainees reflection journals in The Practice of TEAL course. Table 4.3. explained how the teacher-trainees improved their competencies in lesson plan designing. The improvement they made could be seen in the lesson plan they designed for the next teaching. Table 3. The Teacher-trainees Improvement in Lesson Plan designing Subject Weaknesses Improvement (Lesson Plan for the next teaching) S1 The formulation Objective of learning of the sentence was too wordy (Teaching 1). The formulation Objective of learning of the sentence was concise and clear wordy (Teaching 2, 3, and 4). Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 1) Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 2,3,4) The formulation of learning objective covered two or three aspects out of four -- Audience, Behavior, Condition, Degree) (Teaching 1,2) The formulation of learning objective covered two or three aspects out of four -- Audience, Behavior, Condition, Degree) (Teaching 3,4) Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 1,2) Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 3,4) Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection, remedial, and enrichment activity (Teaching 1). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 2,3,4). S2 The formulation of the objective was not in line with the competencies (Teaching 1,2) The formulation of the objective was in line with the competencies (Teaching 3,4) The objective cover one or two competencies only (Teaching 1,2) The objective cover one or two competencies only (Teaching 3,4 Differentiation was not available (teaching 1,2). Differentiation was available (teaching 3,4). Too many exercises of the same kind; not varied/ monotonous, Sufficient, at the right amount of exercises; not varied/ monotonous, not Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 712 not interesting—no pictures (teaching 1,2) interesting—no pictures (teaching 3,4) Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection, remedial, and enrichment activity (Teaching 1). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 2,3,4). S3 The exercise was too simple, not challenging; need more exercises that encourage students’ practice their 21st century skills (Teaching 1,2) The exercise was too simple, not challenging; need more exercises that encourage students’ practice their 21st century skills (Teaching 3,4). Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 1,2) Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs (Teaching 3,4) Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). The exercise was too simple, not challenging; need more exercises that encourage students’ practice their 21st century skills (Teaching 1,2) The exercise was too simple, not challenging; need more exercises that encourage students’ practice their 21st century skills (Teaching 3,4). S4 Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection and enrichment activity (Teaching 1,2). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 3,4). S5 The formulation of learning objective did not yet cover KD 4/ skill (Teaching 1,2). The formulation of learning objective had covered all KD (Teaching 1,2). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection and enrichment activity (Teaching 1,2). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 3,4). S6 Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection and enrichment activity (Teaching 1,2,3). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 4). S7 Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection, remedial, and enrichment activity (Teaching 1). No reflection, remedial, and enrichment activity (Teaching 2,3,4). S8 The objective cover one or two competencies only (Teaching 1) The objective cover one or two competencies only (Teaching 2,3,4 The formulation of learning objective did The formulation of learning objective had not yet cover KD 4/ skill (Teaching 1). covered all KD (Teaching 1,2,3). Differentiation was not available (teaching 1,2). Differentiation was available (teaching 3,4). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). Answer keys were not provided (Teaching 1,2,3, and 4). No reflection, remedial, and enrichment activity (Teaching 1,2,3). Reflection and enrichment activities were available (Teaching 4). From the table above, the researcher found out that teacher-trainees had had made progress in the most frequently occurred weaknesses from the first teaching to the next, as follows: The Formulation of Learning Objective Most teacher-trainees failed to formulate the required learning objective in their first teaching. Most of them missed one or two competencies of the goals of the learning and the elements of ABCD (Audience, Behavior, Condition, and Degree) was not completely visible. After receiving the feedback, some of them made improvements right away in the next teaching but some others delayed the process until the third or fourth teaching. The Learning Materials designed by the teacher-trainees In the first teaching, most teachers designed quite well-arranged materials for the learning with sufficient activities and tasks which are suitable for the learning needs. However, the exercises were too simple, not challenging; need more exercises that encourage students’ practice their 21st century skills. Some of the teaching materials were not in line with the students’ needs. Some of them did not formulate the differentiation in the learning activities. In the next teaching, some of the teacher- trainees made progress immediately in the material design, including the differentiation, and related the materials with the needs of 21st century skills but some others did not improve their materials until the third and fourth teaching. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 713 The Audio-Visual Aids (a.v.a) used in the learning process As we know that media plays very important roles in enhancing the quality of communication between the teacher and the learner. In the first teaching, all students used media in their learning. They used pictures on slides, powerpoint presentations, short videos that help students comprehend the topic of the learning. However, some students did not choose the media properly, like the videos for example, that were not really relevant to the learning needs; too simple or too complicated; the pace was too fast or too slow. The next teaching, some teachers made progress and provided the more appropriate a.v.a in their teaching but some others did it until the third or fourth teaching. The assessment In the first teaching, most teachers constructed the exercises that were too simple, not challenging; and needed more that encouraged students’ practice their 21st century skills. This occurred in the second teaching as well. In the third teaching, teacher-trainees started to make progress in developing the exercises. In addition to the construction and content, all teachers did not provide key answers for the exercises. Some teachers responded to the feedback by providing key answers in the second teaching but some others delayed the change until the third or fourth teaching. The Post-Teaching Activity The most occurred weaknesses in the post- teaching activity when designing lesson plans were the reflection, remedial and enrichment activity. In learning, reflection plays important roles because it will provide information on the learners’ comprehension, shortage, and improvements in their learning. However, most teacher-trainees failed to include reflection in their lesson plan. In the first teaching, all teacher- trainees did not provide a reflection session in the lesson plan. This was not visible for some teacher- trainees even until the last teaching. In addition to reflection, remedial and enrichment activities were also crucial. In the teaching practices, most teacher-trainees did not provide remedial and enrichment activities. After the feedback was delivered, some of them made progress by adding the remedial and motivating enrichment activity in their lesson plan but some others did not really make progress. They did not until the third or fourth teaching and even not at all until the last teaching. Improvement in Teaching Practice Table 4 explained how the teacher-trainees improved their competencies in delivering their lesson plan. The improvement on the teaching skills they made could be seen from the weakness of the teacher-trainees during the teaching practice in the microteaching and the changes of their performance in the next teaching. Table 4. The Teacher-Trainees Improved Their Competencies in Delivering Their Lesson Plan Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) S1 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee did not check the students' attendance lists. Teacher-trainee checked the students' attendance lists. Teacher- trainee used Bahasa too much Teacher-trainee Still used unequal language; too much Bahasa Teacher- trainee still explained the material Teacher-trainee tried not to explain the material but not really sufficient to facilitate students’ participation Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process. (Teacher centered) Teacher-trainee had tried to reduce his/ her roles in the learning process but not really help to achieve a student- centered learning process Teacher- trainee did not provide reflection at Teacher-trainee did not provide reflection at the end of the session. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 714 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) the end of the session. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee still read questions for his/ her students that made the learning was not student- centered. Teacher-trainee tried to invite students’ active participation in the learning activity Teacher- trainee chose the teaching video that was too short. It caused in the reduction of students' understanding of the material. Teacher-trainee chose the sufficient video . It caused in the reduction of students' understanding of the material. Teacher- trainee committed some mispronounce d error. Teacher-trainee still committed some mispronounced error. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee committed some mispronounce d error and grammar. Teacher-trainee committed a little mispronounced error and grammar. Teacher- trainee spoke too fast, not quite appropriate for the students’ level. Teacher-trainee still spoke too fast, not quite appropriate for the students’ level. Teacher- trainee still focused on explaining the material; sounded teacher- centered. Teacher-trainee did some effort to focus on the students’ active participation in their learning. Teaching 4 Teacher-trainee conducted a student-centered learning process though sometimes still explain the material. S2 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee did a nice pre- teaching but not really interesting Teacher-trainee did a nice pre- teaching and quite interesting Teacher- trainee used video but not really relevant to the student’s level. The Teacher-trainee used video but not really relevant to the student’s need. It was too long. Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) language was too difficult. Teacher- trainee did not explain the material clearly. He/ she did not make a ppt to make the comprehensio n easier. Teacher-trainee explained the material quite clearly. He/ she used pictures to make the comprehension easier. The handout was too wordy; no illustration/ pictures to make the comprehensio n easier. The handout was quite good; provided with illustration/ pictures to make the comprehension easier. Teacher- trainee did not facilitate adequate language practice— pronunciation. Teacher-trainee provided quite sufficient language practice— pronunciation, grammar. Teacher- trainee committed many grammars and pronunciation Teacher-trainee committed some grammar and pronunciation Teacher- trainee did not facilitate sufficient amount of question and answer. Teacher-trainee facilitated quite sufficient amount of question and answer but still answer his own question very often. Teacher- trainee did not provide sufficient exposure to the target language, spoke too much Indonesian. Teacher-trainee did some effort shown in facilitating more exposure to English Teacher- trainee did not facilitate a differentiation in his/ her learning. Teacher-trainee did not yet facilitate a differentiation in his/ her learning. Teacher- trainee did not provide reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee did not provide reflection at the end of the session. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee still explain the material too much. The teaching still Teacher-trainee tried to explain the material a little and invite students to participate. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 715 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) sounded teacher- centered. Teacher- trainee did not really facilitate students explore their learning; still served as the main source of learning quite often; the differentiation was not yet visible. Teacher-trainee provide a chance for students to read the material first before he/ she explained it; show a quite good effort to make a student- centered learning but the differentiation was not yet visible. Teacher- trainee used too complicated language, especially when delivering instruction. Teacher-trainee used too complicated language, especially when delivering instruction. Teacher- trainee did not use ppt to help students understand the material. Teacher-trainee used too complicated language, especially when delivering instruction. Teacher- trainee did not facilitate a differentiation in his/ her learning. Teacher-trainee did not yet facilitate a differentiation in his/ her learning. Teacher- trainee did not do the reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee did not do the reflection at the end of the session. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee used video but not too appropriate for students’ level; the pace of the conversation was too fast. Teacher-trainee used video with adequate level and simple language. Teacher- trainee spoke to fast; did not provide students chances to practice using the language; he/ she did not really encourage a two-way communicatio n. Teacher-trainee tried to speak slower but not still not yet at the appropriate pace; tried to provide students chances to practice using the language by asking questions and motivating response in the target language. Teacher- trainee did not Teacher-trainee did not yet do Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) do confirmation check after delivering a task. confirmation check after delivering a task. Teacher- trainee provided a group work activity but not really successful; grouping was not based on differentiation; the students still made unnecessary crowd in the learning process. Teacher-trainee provided a group work activity but not yet really successful and the differentiation process was not really visible; the students still made unnecessary crowd in the learning process. Teacher- trainee did not do the reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee did not do the reflection at the end of the session. Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee did not yet provide variations of task although differentiation was visible S3 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee used too much Indonesian in delivering the lesson. Teacher-trainee still used too much Indonesian in delivering the lesson. Teacher- trainee did not check the students’ comprehensio n. Teacher-trainee checked the students’ comprehension though not quite often. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee still dominated the learning process; little effort was shown to make the learning more student-centered. Differentiated instruction was not yet available. Differentiated instruction was not yet available. Teacher- trainee used too much Indonesian, did not provide adequate exposure to the Target Language. Teacher-trainee still used too much Indonesian, did not provide adequate exposure to the Target Language. Teacher- trainee did not Teacher-trainee did a reflection at Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 716 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) do a reflection at the end of the session. the end of the session but not really appropriate. Teacher- trainee did not provide enrichment activity (homework) Teacher-trainee did not provide enrichment activity (homework) but not really challenging. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee did not provide interactive teaching- learning process. Teacher-trainee motivate students to have interaction in the teaching- learning process but not really help them practice the language; lack of vocabulary and grammar knowledge. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process (teacher- centered) Teacher-trainee tried to facilitate the student- centered learning process by asking questions, inviting students to participate in the discussion of the task, and presenting in front of the class. Group work activity was not so successful; many students still did irrelevant activities that were out of the learning context. The Groupwork activity was quite successful; many students did the group work tasks well.. Differentiated instruction was not yet available. Differentiated instruction was shown in the group work activities. Teacher- trainee did not motivate students to use the target language much; still spoke much in Indonesian. Teacher-trainee showed a quite good effort in providing more exposure in the target language. Teacher- trainee provided a reflection at the end of the session but did not really invite students to reflect on their own learning. Teacher-trainee provided a quite good reflection that encourage students to reflect on their own learning. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee Teacher-trainee provided an Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) provided an interesting pre- teaching activity but not really in line with the topic. interesting pre- teaching activity that related the topic to the students’ life Teacher- students committed some errors in pronunciation and grammar. Teacher-students committed some errors in pronunciation and grammar. Teacher- trainee did not invite students to answer his questions but answered his / her questions himself/ herself. Teacher-trainee gave the opportunity to students to answer his/ her questions. The teaching was still teacher- centered. A quite good effort in motivating the students to be active in the learning process. Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. S4 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee provided questions but not really invited students to participate in answering the questions. Teacher-trainee provided questions and tried to invite students’ participation in answering the questions. Teacher- trainee did not yet provide a reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee provided a quite good reflection that encourage students to reflect on their own learning. Teacher- trainee did not motivate students to use the target language much; still spoke much in Indonesian. Teacher-trainee showed a quite good effort in providing more exposure of the target language by active interaction in the target language. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. The activities were varied but some need to be omitted since it was repetitive. The activities were varied and appropriate for the students’ need. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 717 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee did not check the students’ comprehensio n. Teacher-trainee checked the students’ comprehension though not quite often. The teaching was still teacher- centered. A quite good effort in motivating the students to be active in the learning process. The activities were varied but some need to be omitted since it was repetitive. The activities were varied and appropriate for the students’ need. Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed many grammars and pronunciation S5 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee committed some minor errors in pronunciation and grammar. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation; no grammar mistake occurred. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee showed a good effort to make the learning more student-centered. Differentiated instruction was not yet available. Differentiated instruction was shown in the group work activities. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee still dominated the learning process; little effort was shown to make the learning more student-centered. The activities were varied but some need to be omitted since it was repetitive. The activities were varied and appropriate for the students’ needs. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Teacher- trainee spoke too fast; need to slow the pace. Teacher-trainee spoke at the right pace. Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. S6 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee spoke too fast; need to slow the pace. Teacher-trainee spoke at the right pace. Teacher- trainee provided questions but not really invited students to participate in answering the questions. Teacher-trainee provided questions and tried to invite students’ participation in answering the questions. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee showed a quite good effort to make the learning more student- centered. Teacher- trainee provided very few activities that encourage students to practice their critical thinking. Teacher-trainee showed a good effort to provide activities that encourage students to practice their critical thinking. Teacher- trainee used less English Teacher-trainee used sufficient balance of both Indonesian and English Teacher- trainee did not yet provide a reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee provided a quite good reflection that encourage students to reflect on their own learning. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee showed a good effort to make the learning more student-centered. Teaching 3 The activities were varied but some need to be omitted since it was repetitive. The activities were varied and appropriate for the student’s needs. Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 718 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. S7 Teaching 1 Teacher- trainee provided questions but not really invited students to participate in answering the questions. Teacher-trainee provided questions and tried to invite students’ participation in answering the questions. Teacher- trainee provided very few activities that encourage students to practice their critical thinking. Teacher- trainee provided questions but not really invited students to participate in answering the questions. Teacher-trainee provided questions and tried to invite students’ participation in answering the questions. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee still dominated the learning process; little effort was shown to make the learning more student-centered. Teacher- trainee used less English Teacher-trainee used sufficient balance of both Indonesian and English Teacher- trainee did not yet provide a reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee provided a quite good reflection that encourage students to reflect on their own learning. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee provided a good video but the pace was too fast; need to find a more suitable video that fits the students’ level. Teacher-trainee provided a good video that was a suitable video that fits the students’ level. Teacher- trainee committed very little error Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) in pronunciation. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee delivered the materials with quite much exceeding time. Teacher-trainee delivered the materials at the required time. Teacher- trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. S8 Teaching 1 Differentiated instruction was not yet available. Differentiated instruction was shown in the group work activities. Teacher- trainee did not invite students to answer his questions but answered his / her questions himself/ herself. Teacher-trainee gave the opportunity to students to answer his/ her questions. Teacher- trainee still dominated the learning process; Teacher-trainee still dominated the learning process; little effort was shown to make the learning more student-centered. Group work activity was not so successful; many students still did irrelevant activities that were out of the learning context. The Groupwork activity was quite successful; many students did the group work tasks well. Teacher- trainee did not yet provide a reflection at the end of the session. Teacher-trainee provided a quite good reflection that encourage students to reflect on their own learning. Teaching 2 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. Teacher-trainee committed very little error in pronunciation. The teaching was still teacher- centered. Teacher-trainee tried a good effort in motivating the students to be Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 719 Subject Teaching Weaknesses Improvement (In the next teaching) active in the learning process. Teacher- trainee did not provide enrichment activity (homework) Teacher-trainee did not provide enrichment activity (homework) but not really challenging. Teaching 3 Teacher- trainee did not provide an enrichment activity. Teacher-trainee provided sufficient enrichment activity that encourage students to practice their critical thinking. Teacher- trainee did the reflection at the end of the session but was not quite relevant to the student’s needs. Teacher-trainee did an appropriate reflection at the end of the session. Teaching 4 Teacher- trainee committed a minor error in pronunciation. From the above table, the researcher summarized the development of the teacher- trainees skill in implementing the Differentiated Instruction in three categories, as follows: The pre-teaching activity Almost all teacher-trainees provided pre-teaching activities in their first teaching but some failed to build an interesting atmosphere that could boost their students’ motivation in the learning. At the next meeting some teacher-trainees made quite a good improvement; provided interesting pre- teaching activities using pictures, videos, gym, or short stories told by the teacher to stimulate students’ curiosity and interest. The whilst teaching activity Most teacher-trainees had made a lot of progress from the first teaching to the fourth as follows: a. Differentiation in the learning process Almost all teacher-trainees designed Differentiated Instruction activities in their lesson plan but in the first teaching, some did not show the differentiation in the learning process. The lecturer’s feedback on the first teaching motivated them to facilitate the differentiation in the learning in the next micro-teaching. One teacher-trainee did not facilitate the differentiation after the third teaching although he mentioned it in the lesson plans. Presentation of the materials From the table above, the researcher found that teacher-trainees had made a lot of improvements in the third and fourth teaching. Some talented teacher-trainees were not facing crucial problems during their teaching practice. In terms of language use. Some students still committed errors in pronunciation and grammar though not major and also faced difficulties in using both languages—the target language and the first language at the right portion. In addition, teacher-trainees failed to present a question-and-answer activity effectively at their first teaching. Almost all students asked questions but they did not wait for the students to answer. They also did not provide creative ways of asking questions like Keep asking why or following every answer with a question that challenges the students. In the second, third, and fourth teaching the teacher-trainees had shown their great effort to conduct the question-and-answer activity effectively. Apart from the two elements mentioned above, teacher-trainees also failed to perform various activities that encourage the students to think critically during the first teaching. Some teacher- trainees made progress very soon in the second and the rest teaching but one should wait until the third or fourth teaching. Last but not the least, all teacher-trainees used adequate and appropriate a.v.a (audio visual aids) but Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 720 some were not carefully chosen at the first teaching. The power point presentation designed by some teacher- trainees did not yet provide sufficient assistance for student’s comprehension on the topic discussed; too wordy, not interesting, too small letters. From the feedback, they provided better a.v.a so that it effectively facilitated sufficient aid for the students in the learning process. Classroom management and time management Teacher-trainees ran the classroom quite well during the learning process. Most of them conducted very good teaching; creative, interactive, challenging, interesting, and motivating but not really facilitating a student- centered learning at the first teaching; teacher still posed himself/ herself as the main source of learning and actor. After the feedback was given, the teacher- trainees made some improvements. Most of them were aware of their weaknesses but one teacher-trainee (S2) made the same mistakes in the second and third teaching. He made a better improvement in his last teaching. The second element that teacher-trainees often failed to manage was the group work management. Most teacher-trainees found difficulty in implementing the group work activity. Some of them designed good and challenging activities that were appropriate for the Differentiated Instruction classroom. Somehow, the implementation in the classroom was not so successful in the first and second teaching; one teacher-trainee even forgot to provide the differentiation process. In the next teaching, the teacher-trainee showed good progress in managing the group work based on the differentiation. Interaction Most teacher-trainees facilitated interactive teaching but did not really provide adequate chances for students to practice the target language. Most teacher-trainees still spoke much Indonesian so that the students did not get sufficient exposure to the target language. Most of them did a one-way communication so that the learning process sounded teacher-centered. The teacher-trainees made good progress in the next teaching session. One student still did the same thing until the third teaching. The post teaching activity Post-teaching activity is equally important that each activity is meaningful, and ensures student development and advancement through the lesson. They should enable students to engage with and develop their skills, knowledge, and understandings. One of the post-teaching activities that the teacher-trainees failed to build was the reflection at the end of the session. All teacher-trainees did not provide a reflection in the first teaching. After the feedback was given, they tried to provide one in the next teaching. In addition to reflection, many teacher-trainees did not provide enrichment activities during the first teaching. Some teacher-trainees provided this kind of activity but did not really motivate students to develop their critical thinking. The activities were merely a repetition of the previously discussed in the classroom. The Effectiveness of the Differentiated Instruction lesson plan To answer this question, the researcher used the data from the questionnaire of the teacher-trainees’ after completing their teaching practices in the Practice of TEAL course. Table 5 explains the effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction for teaching practices. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 721 Table 5. The Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction for Teaching Practices Questions S Answer What is your opinion about Differentiation Instruction in the learning process? S1 In my opinion, Differentiated Instruction is a good process of learning because it pays attention on the students’ uniqueness. S2 I think, Differentiated Instruction is a pedagogical-didactical approach that provides teachers with a starting point for meeting students' diverse learning needs. S3 My opinion about Differentiated Instruction learning that is tailored to the needs of students with the aim of maximizing the potential of each student because each student has different needs or learning processes. DI is structured based on student differences which include learning readiness, interests, and learning profiles designed by differentiating content, process, and product. S4 I think, differentiated instruction learning process consume a lot of preparation time for the teacher. however, it encourages the teacher's creativity in designing activities. Also, it motivates the students in the learning process since the way students learn is in accordance to their interest, learning style and abilities. S5 I think differentiated instruction is the learning process based on the students' abilities. It is a learning process that contains some activities that make the students comfortable to do it. So, the students feel happy and no tension in the learning. S6 In my opinion, it is appropriate for students since the students can learn according to their abilities. Therefore, the learning will be more meaningful and fruitful for students. Besides, through differentiated instruction learning, the teacher can provide the learning process creatively that will motivate students in joining the lesson. However, it might not suitable for some schools because they do not have adequate facilites especially technology that can help them to design the learning. S7 I think Differentiated Instruction is a good approach for teaching because it looks at the students’ different needs, interests, and learning styles. S8 In my opinion, it is a kind of approach in conducting the EFL lesson by matching with the students’ learning style. The lesson is planned differently according to the students’ needs. This may be overwhelming for the teacher because he/she has to prepare and provide more than one activity. DI instructed the students to involve in the lesson. It can be in the form of group work or presentation. The students' performance is important because this approach is also in line with student-centered approach. 1. Do you think it is effective for the teacher? Explain in detail. S1 It is effective for teachers since it motivates teachers to consider different needs of their students. It also encourages teachers to be creative because they have to design various learning materials, strategies, or techniques to meet the students’ varied needs. S2 I think this learning is very effective for teaching because it provides an instruction and learning that developing student needs in their learning. S3 This learning is effective for teachers because it only provides instructions and learning that will be developed by students according to the needs of their learning process. S4 For the teacher, its effective because the teacher does not need to explain the whole material to the students since the students are facilitated to learn the material by themselves first. S5 For teacher it is effective because teacher can design many activities based on instruction, students' interest, learning profile and etc. It can make the teacher think how to teach in creative way so the students will more interested in joining the class. S6 In my opinion, it is effective for both the teacher and students. First, it will help the teacher to understand students' abilities about the material. Thus, the teacher can design the material that suits students' abilities. Besides, by using differentiated instruction learning, the teacher are also given the opportunity to design the activities and tasks creatively that will reduce students' boredom in the classroom. Nowadays, students tend to be bored when they only listen to the teacher explanation. So, through the differentiated instruction learning, the students will be more interested in joining each task and activity since the teacher have provided attractive task and activity. S7 In my opinion, Differentiated Instruction is effective for teachers because they can figure out the students heterogenous nature in their class. It also effective for teachers’ professionalism because every time they are about to teach, they must design various activities that provide suitable context for their heterogonous students. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 722 S8 This is effective because the teacher can deliver the appropriate material for each learning style. Even though the teacher has to provide different kinds of activities, they can make the process of the learning simpler in the classroom. The teacher does not need to explain the whole material but lets the students learn through their style. Also it motivates teachers to be creative and flexible. Although teachers need a lot of time for teaching preparation, they will get the benefit from the practice of managing students’ various needs. 2. Do you think it is effective for the students ? Explain in detail. S1 It is effective for students because they have the chance to study with their own pace, interest, and style. In addition, students will also feel that learning is enjoyable because they like it; there is no force to learn. S2 This is effective for students because with this teaching learning that only focusing on student needs. This learning get student's need, maximizes the quality of student learning, increases student motivation, makes students more involved and focused in class, enables students to relate learning to life, hones student self-management skills, and improves student achievement. S3 This is very effective for students because teachers only need to adjust to the different needs of students. If it is reached, then students will get the material to the maximum with the skills they have. This learning get student's need, maximizes the quality of student learning, increases student motivation, makes students more involved and focused in class, enables students to relate learning to life, hones student self- management skills, and improves student achievement. S4 it is effective for the students because the activities in the learning process do not make the students feel bored and its effective to reach higher achievement since the material is learned in accordance with students' interest, learning style, and abilities. S5 For students, it is effective because the students can choose the activities based on their ability, learning style. So, that activity can help them in understanding the materials easily beacuse they will not bored and happy in learning process. S6 It is also effective for students. They can enjoy the learning because they learn based on their abilities so that they were not burdened. Beside that, they will do the task given easily since the teacher has provided suitable task for the students. So, it will help the students in understanding the material learned. S7 I think Differentiated Instruction is effective for students because it provides variety of topics and students may learn with their own styles of learning and pace. Not all students are fast learners and learn in the same ways. It also boosts their motivation because they are allowed to study with their own needs. S8 The material motivates them to learn and practice more to be able to apply the material in the real world. The students will be instructed to do the task that matches to their learning style. This may raise their interest and willingness to learn the material. From the above table, the researcher summarized the teacher-trainees stance on the effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction for teaching practices, as follows: Question 1: What is your opinion about Differentiation Instruction in the learning process? To sum up the teacher-trainees opinion about Differentiated Instruction learning process is that it is a pedagogical-didactical approach that provides teachers with a starting point for meeting students' diverse learning needs. It is a good process of learning because it pays attention to the students’ uniqueness. In addition, it is tailored to the needs of students with the aim of maximizing the potential of each student because each student has different needs or learning processes. In this Differentiated Instruction learning process, the learning is structured based on student differences which include learning readiness, interests, and learning profiles designed by differentiating content, process, and product. Moreover, since Differentiated Instruction learning consumes a lot of preparation time for the teacher, it encourages their creativity in designing activities. the teacher can provide the learning process creatively that will motivate students in joining the lesson. However, it might not be suitable for some schools because they do not have Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 723 adequate facilities, especially technology that can help them to design the learning. For students, Differentiated Instruction learning motivates them to engage in the learning process since the way students learn is in accordance with their interest, learning style and abilities. It accommodates some activities that make the students comfortable to do it. So, the students feel happy and no tension in the learning. For them, learning will be more meaningful and fruitful. Question 2: Do you think it is effective for the teacher? The research found out the effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction learning process in terms of the followings: 1. It motivates teachers to consider different needs of their students; 2. They can figure out the students’ heterogenous nature in their class. 3. It is effective for teachers’ professionalism because every time they are about to teach, they must design various activities that provide suitable context for their heterogonous students. 4. It encourages teachers to be creative because they have to design various learning materials, strategies, or techniques to meet the students’ varied needs. Teachers have the opportunity to design many activities based on students' interest, learning profile and readiness. It will make the teachers think how to teach in creative way so the students will be more interested in joining the class. Question 3: Do you think it is effective for the students? The research found out the effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction learning process in terms of the followings: 1. It is effective for students because they have the chance to study with their own pace, interest, and learning style. Not all students have the same pace of learning, what they like to discuss, and the way they learn; 2. It motivates students to get involved in their learning since teachers do not explain the whole material to the students but they are facilitated to learn the material by themselves first which is good to practice their literacy and critical thinking skills; 3. Students will also feel that learning is enjoyable because they like it; there is no force to learn; 4. The in-context learning will facilitate a link between the lesson and their real life. Thus, they will motivate them to learn and practice. The students will be instructed to do the task that matches to their learning style. This may raise their interest and willingness to learn the material. This section presents the discussion based on the findings of the study. It is concerned about the implementation of the Differentiated Instruction Lesson Plan for Junior High School students in the practice of TEAL course. The Teacher-trainees Design of Differentiated Instruction lesson plans According Mulyasa (2011) states that a lesson plan is a plan which describes procedures and management of study in order to reach one or more basic competencies regulated in the Standard of Content and extended in the syllabus. It directs a teacher in the appropriate direction toward achieving predetermined objectives. It also aids a teacher in assessing and evaluating themselves in order to apply new tactics and strategies. In other words, lesson planning is a daily task for each class which a teacher is going to teach. Based on the research, teacher-trainees had designed sufficient lesson plans as required in Kurikulum Merdeka. They fulfilled the three basic components of Merdeka Lesson Plan, i.e.: Goal of learning, learning activity, and assessment. They also accomplished the differentiation of the learning process in terms of interest, readiness, and learning profile. Moreover, they also completed the additional elements for lesson planning such as the learning materials and media employed in their teaching. Based on the data of the findings above, it can be said that lesson planning provides good Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 724 guidance for teaching and learning as shown in Table 4. The Teacher-trainees Implementation of their Differentiated Instruction lesson plans The theory of multiple intelligences (MI) as postulated by Gardner helps teachers to find out the preference and discover different learning styles and family backgrounds, readiness, gender, culture and ethnic are all affected factors for students’ diversity (Heacox, 2002 as cited in Ruhan Karadag, 2010). The research had shown that the implementation of the Differentiated Instruction lesson plan had brought about the essence of differentiation in learning. As shown in Table 4.2 that teacher-trainees had designed three types of differentiation (readiness, interests, and learning profiles) in their lesson plans and implemented the plans into teaching practice for Junior High School students in the Practice of TEAL course. The findings from the data thus postulated the teacher's concerns in students’ multiple intelligences by means of differentiating the learning process. Teacher-trainees Improvement of their lesson planning and teaching The data (table 4) collected from the rubrics (lesson plan and teaching rubrics) described the improvement of teacher-trainees skills in designing the lesson plans and putting them into practices. As stated by Bransford, et.al (2005) pre- service teacher education program aims to prepare for graduation to become a qualified teacher equipped with teaching practices that will provide experience and knowledge to meet increasing demands associated with the teaching profession. The quality of teaching lies in good theory and the best methods available can be used in teaching. Furthermore, pre-service teachers have challenges in teaching practice. In addition to Bransford, Ali et al. (2014) proposed that there are some challenges faced by pre-service teachers in teaching practice. First is individual challenges. Those challenges might make pre-service teachers fail in teaching practice. They are managing classroom and pre- service teachers‟ discipline, planning lessons, managing relief teaching, inadequate teaching and learning facilities and resources, overcoming disruption of lessons, and teaching practice administration and management. As shown by the data, teacher-trainees improved their lesson planning and teaching in their teaching practices course. From the first teaching to the last, they made a very great effort in both lesson plans and their implementations. The effectiveness of the Differentiated Instruction lesson plan According to Hall et al. (2014), differentiation is a strategy that supports instructors in addressing each student’s individual level of readiness, interest, and learning profiles. Teachers who employ differentiated instructional strategies will usually adjust the elements of a lesson from one group of students to another with regard to their readiness, interests, and learning profile so that those who may need more time or a different teaching approach to grasp a concept get the specialized assistance they need, while those students who have already mastered a concept can be assigned a different learning activity or move on to a new concept or lesson. Data collected from the students’ response showed a strong positive response from the participants on the Differentiated Instruction learning process. Tabe 4.4. showed that the effectiveness is both for teachers and students. The implementation of Differentiated Instruction lesson plans affected teachers' creativity in conducting the learning since their students are heterogeneous and students’ engagement in their learning as it is suitable to their needs, level of competencies, and style of learning CONCLUSION Based on the analysis of the lesson plan documentation, teaching observations (zoom), teacher-trainees reflection journals, lecturer’s feedback and questionnaire, this study to a certain extent was successful in several aspects. Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 725 Basically, teacher-trainees had shown a relevant progress to the requirements of “Kurrikulum Merdeka '' lesson planning. They had met the components of the Lesson Plan development and conducted differentiation in their teaching, i.e.: readiness, learning profile, and interests. The findings revealed that the effectiveness of the Differentiated Instruction lesson plan for Junior High School Students in the teaching practice brought about many positive impacts for both the teacher-trainees and students. They are in line with the previous study conducted by Ginja and Chen (2020) that the differentiated instruction approach is essential for a diverse classroom. It increased students’ motivation and improved their relationship between students and teachers and also narrowed the gap of students. Students received a varied learning process which was suitable to their uniqueness and needs. The students were facilitated with different processes of learning that enable optimizing their knowledge, attitude, and skills. For the teacher, based on the questionnaire, they mentioned the so-called creative, innovative, and eagerness to learn more and more to fulfill the students’ needs. Regardless of the positive impacts, the shortcut was unavoidable. Teacher-trainees spent too much time designing the diagnostic tests. Since they are not majoring in psychology or education theory, this lack of knowledge has brought about serious problems in the designing of the text items. REFERENCES Andini, D. W. (2016). Differentiated Instruction: Solusi Pembelajaran Dalam Keberagaman Siswa di Kelas Inklusi. 340–349. Ayua, G. (2017). Effective Teaching Strategies. 0.13140/RG.2.2.34147.09765. Ball, D.L., & Forzani, F.M. (2007). What makes education research "educational"? Educational Researcher, 36(9), 529-540. Beto, C. (2020). Merdeka Belajar Adalah Kemerdekaan Berpikir Bikic, A., Reichow, B., McCauley, S., Ibrahim, K., & Sukhodolsky, D. (2016). Meta- analysis of organizational skills interventions for children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Bosker, R. J. (2005). De grenzen van gedifferentieerd onderwijs [The limits of differentiated instruction] (Oration). Retrieved from Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (Eds.). (2007). Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principle An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. San Francisco: Longman Chand, V., Kuril, S., & Shukla, A. (2020). Dialoguing with teacher-educators, valorizing teacher innovations. London Review of Education. 18. 451-66. 10.14324/LRE.18.3.09. Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research Methodsin Education (4th ed.). London Routledge Cooper, J. M. (1990). Classroom Teaching Skill. Lexington, Massachusetts Toronto: DC.Heath and Company. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. Jossey-Bass. Denzin, NK. (1978). Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill. Deunk, M. I., Jacobse, A. E., de Boer, H., Doolaard, S., & Bosker, R. J. (2018). Effective differentiation practices: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the cognitive effects of differentiation practices in primary education. Educational Research Review, 24, 31-54. Retrieved from Dyer, C. (1995). Beginning research in psychology: A practical guide to research methods and statistics. Blackwell Publishing. Eurydice & Darra. (2018). The planning of teaching in the context of lesson study: research findings. Canada: International Education Studies, 11(2). Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 726 Fink, D. L. (2005). Integrated Course Design. Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center. Gagne, R.M. (1985). The Condition of Learning Theory of Instruction. New York: Rinehart Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books Inc. Ginja, T. G., & Chen, X. (2020). Teacher educators’ perspectives and experiences towards differentiated instruction. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 781-798. Gower, R., Philips, D., & Walters, S. (1995). Teaching Practice Handbook . UK: Macmillan Publishers. Limited. Hall, T., Vue, G., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2004). Differentiated Instruction and Implications for UDL Implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (Links updated 2014). Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice Of English Language Teaching The Practice Of English Language Teaching (4th Ed.). USA: Pearson Education Limited. Heacox, D. (2002). Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing. Retrieved on Monday, 4th 2021 at 12:40 PM. Hung, Y.-J. (2015). Practice of differentiated instruction and alternative assessments with young EFL learners in Taiwan. TESOL International Journal, 10(2), 48– 63. Hunter, M. (1994). Planning for effective instruction: Lesson design. In Enhancing Teaching, pp. 87-95. Ismajli, H., Imami-Morina, Ilirjana. (2018). Differentiated Instruction: Understanding and Applying Interactive Strategies to Meet the Needs of All the Students. International Journal of Instruction, v11 n3 p207-218 Jul 2018. Jalongo, M. R., Rieg, S. A., & Helterbran, V. R. (2007). Planning for learning: Collaborative approaches to lesson design and review. New York: Teachers College PressNew York: Macmillan College Publishing Company Jensen, L. (2001). Planning Lessons. In: M. Celce-Murcia, ed., Teaching English as a Second Language, 3rd ed. Boston United States of America: Heinle, Cengage Learning. Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., & Ramsook, L. (2013). The impact of differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(3). Karadag, R., & Yasar, S. (2010). Effects of differentiated instruction on students’ attitudes towards Turkish courses: an action research. Procedia Social Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1394–1399. Retrieved from Kemendikbud. (2016). Permendikbud Nomor 22 Tahun 2016 Tentang Standar Proses Pendidikan Dan Menengah. Jakarta: Kemendikbud Knowles, M. S. (1990). The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co. Lesiak, K. (2015). Teaching English to Adolescents. Poland: Department of English Language, Poznan College of Modern Language Mager, Robert F. (1984). Preparing Instructional Objectives. Belmont: Fearon Publisher Manyarara, B. C. (2015). Lesson Planning for Teacher Effectiveness. Department of Curriculum and Arts in Education, University of Zimbabwe. Mcmahon, M. (1997). Social Constructivism and the World Wide Web-A Paradigm for Learning. "Merdeka Belajar: Kebijakan Lompat-lompat ala Nadiem Makarim – Muslimah News". www.muslimahnews.com. Reytieved on July, 20th 2021 At 10.47 PM. Msangya, B.W., Mkoma, S.L., Yihuan, W. (2016). Teaching practice experience for undergraduate student teachers: A case study of the department of education at sokoine university of agriculture. Tanzania. Journal of Education and Practice, 7 (14). www.iiste.org. http://www.iiste.org/ Mujib Abdillah, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (4) (2022) 705-704 727 Mulyasa. 2011. Manajemen Berbasis Sekolah, Konsep, strategi dan Implementasi. Bandung : PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Nesari, A.J. (2014). The important role of lesson plan on educational achievement of iranian efl teachers' attitudes. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 2, Issue 5. Patton, MQ. (1999). "Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis."HSR: Health Services Research. 34 (5) Part II. pp. 1189-1208. Raths, J. D., & McAninch, A. C. (2003). Teacher beliefs and classroom performance: The impact of teacher education. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing. Reed, M. & Michaud, C. (2010). Goal-Driven Lesson Planning for Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. University of Michigan Press. Retnawati, H., Sulistyaningsih, E., & Yin, L. (2018). Students’ readiness to teaching practice experience: A review from the mathematics education students' view. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 5(1), 1-17. Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Rodríguez-Gallego, Margarita. (2007). Lesson planning in Primary and Secondary Education. Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to Learn for the 80s. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company. Russell, M. and Airasian, P. (2012). Classroom Assessment Concepts and Applications. 7th Edition. McGraw-Hill, Columbus, OH. Saleh, A. H. A. E. (2021). The effectiveness of differentiated instruction in improving bahraini efl secondary school students in reading comprehension skills. Journal of Research and Innovation in Language: REILA, 3 (2), 135-145. Sencer, B. Ö. M. & Saban, A. I. (2021). Towards the development of teachers for the future. S. Afr. j. educ, 41 (2), 1-9. Shyman, E. (2010). A Comparison of the Concepts of Democracy and Experience in a Sample of Major Works by Dewey and Freire. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 43. 1035 - 1046. Steenbergen-Hu et al. (2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on k–12 students’ academic achievement: findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86 (4), 849–899. Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7. Suhana, C. (2014). Konsep Strategi Pembelajaran. Bandung: PT Refika Aditama Tomlinson, C. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 77– 87. Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and Managing a Differentiated Classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Valiandes, S. (2015). Evaluating the Impact of Differentiated Instruction on Literacy and Reading in Mixed Ability Classrooms: Quality and Equity Dimensions of Education Effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 45, 17-26. Wilkinson, SD, Penney, D. (2014). The effects of setting on classroom teaching and student learning in mainstream mathematics, English and science lessons: A critical review of the literature in England. Educational Review, 66(4), 411–427. Woodward, T. (2001). Planning lessons and courses: Designing sequences of work for the language classroom. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press.