A student with mild hearing loss is a student who has specific learning needs that need

to be differentiated for, by the effective teacher, in the classroom. Students’ level of

hearing loss, in general, in determining its severity, is measured “as the… decibels
(dB) of a person’s hearing thresholds (the softest sounds which can be detected)
[increases] relative to normal hearing levels” (The State of Queensland, 2016, p. 16).
This means for a student characterized with mild hearing loss, like the male student
whose needs will be the point of large focus in this paper, they typically have a hearing
threshold between 21 dB and 45 dB; while, in comparison, another student,
characterized with profound hearing loss, typically has hearing only above 91 dB (The
State of Queensland, 2016, p. 16).
Hearing loss, like that experienced, albeit mildly, by the male focus student, is
diagnosed in three ‘types’ of loss, of which, these include: Conductive hearing loss,
(which is a permanent or temporary hearing condition), where sound struggles to
transmit through the outer ear (the exterior ear ‘canal’ that leads to your eardrum) or
middle ear (directly behind the ear drum) and the “sound [heard] appears softer to the
listener, that is, the quantity of sound is affected;” Sensorineural hearing loss, where
a student/person experiences, “a [permanent] difficulty with the inner ear process,” in
turning sound into transformed electric signals, “[or] in the transmission of the sound
along the auditory nerve to the brain [itself]” with said sounds, if heard at all, being
softer and distorted; or finally mixed hearing loss, where the student/person has a
combination of the symptoms of both of the two hearing loss types above (The State
of Queensland, 2016, p. 16).
Over all, when it comes to the classroom though, students with mild hearing loss, like
the male focus student especially, since they have developed hearing loss at such an
early age, are “fundamentally [challenged in their] initial development of
communication, language and social skills and [even their ability to perceive other’s
speech, which] can result in a normally intelligent child failing to reach age-appropriate
standards;” especially in their literacy/reading skills (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway,
2014, p. 256-257). The impact on the learning outcomes of this male student also
presents a point of differentiated learning, when it comes to achieving the same
vocabulary/spoken skill level as their peers with normal hearing, as, “if we don’t hear
some sounds, we won’t produce them in our speech, and if we hear some sounds in
poor quality and a distorted way, we will produce them that way;… [meaning] we may
not share close social and communicative ties with our major caregivers, we may have
limits to our social and cognitive understanding, …[and] we may enter school with
fewer of the experiential, cognitive and linguistic assets of our hearing peers” (Hyde,
Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. 263). Therefore, from an early age, the responsibility
is often placed on the families, teachers and caregivers of these students with mild
hearing loss, to “provide them with a wide range of experiences [in] a language-rich
environment and [give them] the opportunity to explore their world” (Hyde, Carpenter,
& Conway, 2014, p. 263). Since this male student with mild hearing loss has a hearing
mother and two older hearing siblings, along with his deaf father (who he possibly
inherited his mild loss from), there is ample opportunity for this to happen, even outside
school.
Some more general classroom characteristics of students with mild hearing loss, like
this male student, typically include: easily inattentive or distracted; can hear a loud
buzzing noise; complaints about sour ears; behavioral problems; cannot hear in noisy
environments or difficulty locating the source of the speaker/sounds in a room; high
use of physical activity; and will avoid vocally contributing, withdrawing from the class
discussion, among other characteristics (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. 261).
Modern History unit learning activities (Arab-Israeli Conflict) and ILP
Key learning outcomes of all students by the end of the unit:

 “Comprehend [historical] terms, concepts and issues in relation to [the Arab

Israeli Conflict (AIC)]”, (such as the chronology of events, the
ideological/cultural/political influences existing between the Palestinians/Arabs
and Israelis, etc.), (The State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
 Analyze the evidence from historical sources (primary and secondary) to show
understanding about the AIC (The State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
 Synthesize the evidence from historical sources to construct a historical
argument about the AIC (The State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
 Evaluate the evidence from historical sources to make judgements about the
AIC, by focusing on:
- Short, medium and long term causes of the conflict (The State of Queensland,
2017, p. 83).
- Role/significance of ideas, people, groups and other historical features (The
State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
- “Effects, continuities and changes” (The State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
- Points of perspective and contestability raised by historians (The State of
Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
 “Devise historical questions and conduct research, and create a response that
communicates meaning to suit purpose by presenting a historical essay based
on research” (i.e. the main learning outcome of the summative assessment
task), (The State of Queensland, 2017, p. 83).
Classroom Learning Activities
Activity 1:
‘Walk and talk’ activity (NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).
1. Teacher identifies the historical theme, event(s) or historical concept about the
AIC that is to be discussed by the class
2. Teacher groups whole class into 3 equal groups of students and assigns 3
unique historical discussion questions, that relate to the historical
theme/events/concept, to each of the independent groups. One of these
students, in each group, is designated the timekeeper.
3. Student have 1 minute – 2 minutes to discuss/respond to their own group’s
historical question amongst themselves; students write down any conclusions
they make as a collaborative group
 4. After the timekeepers in each group report to their peers that their time is up,
the whole group, bar the timekeeping student (who stays in place/stays at the
same ‘question/group’ throughout the activity), splits in half and disperses
evenly into the other question groups (teacher assists with this)
5. Steps 3 and 4 are repeated twice more, until all students (bar the three
timekeepers) have participated in the discussion of each question
6. Teacher gathers whole classroom of students back together, as one, and asks
students to report back their findings to the whole class
Activity 2:
Venn Diagram (NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).
1. Teacher displays images of two visual historical sources, that depict different
historical viewpoints/representations of the same historical event of the AIC, up
on PowerPoint/data projector
2. Teacher groups all students into groups of 3-4 students and hands out a
worksheet with a Venn diagram on it to every student in each group
3. Students, in each group, both discuss between themselves and then write down
the unique historical characteristics of each source in the identified Venn
diagram circle that corresponds with each said source
4. Student groups discuss any similarities they can see between the two sources
and then writes them down in the middle, overlapping section of the two circles
5. All groups report back to both the teacher, and all other students, about what
they found out about each of the sources
Activity 3:
The Four Corners activity
1. Teacher vocally asks a question, or states a historical statement, about the AIC,
to the class and gives them up to 4 options they can respond with in response
(with each option being attached to a number that is wall-tacked in each of the
4 corners of the room)
2. Students think, discuss and then move to the room corner with the number,
attached to a response to each of the questions/statements, that they agree
with
3. Once all students have chosen, teacher asks various students to explain, out
loud, WHY they have chosen the number/response they have chosen.
4. Steps 1-3 are repeated, at least until all the questions that the teacher wants to
ask students to respond to have been asked
Activity 4
Global Café activity (NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).
1. Students gather into groups of 4-8 and label their group/café location with a
name
2. A member of each group is designated as the recorder that remains at the same
table/café, throughout the activity, and records the conversations of his/her
group as accurately as possible
 3. The teacher gives each café a historical topic about the AIC to discuss and
each café of students proceeds to discuss their opinions, experiences or
information about their topic freely; the recorder may contribute as well, so long
as they are still accurately recording
4. Every 5 to 8 minutes, all students move randomly to new cafés; all the cafés
should have different members after this rotation
5. When a new café is formed, the recorder, who was at the same table with the
last café group, describes to the newcomers the key points of the previous café
occupants. The new café occupants continue to discuss the historical topic of
that café, while the recorder continues to take notes.
6. This process can be repeated up to 3-5 times by the teacher, until all students
have had a chance to contribute to each of the cafés.
7. Recorders report back their findings to the classroom and then the teacher
guides discussion about the different topics, with the whole class
Activity 5
Jigsaw activity (NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).
1. Break up all students in the class into groups of 4 and number each member in
each group 1-4
2. Designate a mini project topic on the AIC to each team/group, such as the Six
Day War
3. Give each student, in each group, a task they must research information about
independently, like for example person 1 researches historical visual sources
on the topic, person 2 researches the historical chronology of their group’s
topic, etc.
4. Each group/team reforms back together, after completing their tasks, and pools
their historical information/evidence together to finish their projects
Activity 6
Model Mapping activity
1. Teacher draws 5 ‘thought bubbles’ up on the whiteboard with a singular word,
representing a topic about the AIC, in the middle of the bubbles
2. Students gather into an equal 5 groups and each group gathers together and
discusses what historical information they know about their ‘thought bubble’
topic
3. When requested by the teacher, each group walks up to the whiteboard and
draws lines away from their central thought bubble, with the students’
ideas/responses attached to the end of each line
4. Each group is given 5-10 minutes to demonstrate their knowledge on the
whiteboard, in succession
Activity 7
Placement Consensus activity (NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).
 1. Teacher groups all students into groups of 4 and hands out a large A2/A1 piece
of paper to each group, with a blank placemat consensus table on it; like for
example, the one that can be seen in Appendix A bellow.
2. Teacher displays a historical visual source (like a political cartoon), about the
AIC, up on the data projector and ask students to answer what they think the
sources’ meaning, accuracy, bias, validity and representativeness are (in their
own words).
3. Students write down their arguments/responses, to these questions about the
source, in their own ‘corner’ of the placemat consensus table, along with the
others in their group
4. Once done, all students, in each group of 4, discuss what they have written
down with each other; eventually forming a group consensus that synthesizes
all their responses to the source into one (for the group to then share with the
rest of the class)
Activity 8
Think-pair-share activity
1. Ask students to look at a historical source about the AIC (visual or written),
displayed on the data projector, and get them to think, for 5 minutes, about what
the source is trying to tell them (its meaning, representativeness, etc.). Students
are to take down notes on their thoughts.
2. Students are to then get into pairs and discuss with their partner both their
thoughts and the other’s thoughts on the source as well, for 10 mins. Both
students write/synthesize their thoughts into a combined, unified set of notes
about the source itself.
3. Each pair of students then goes and finds another pair of students – to form
groups of 4. Each of the groups of 4 then discuss what they have concluded
about the source and pool their notes into a final version of what they all agree
are the main things the historical source is telling them about the past. Students
spend a maximum of 15 mins on this.
4. All groups of 4 report back to the class
Activity 9
Y-Chart activity
1. Students are asked to practice critical thinking/historical empathy, by
placing/imagining themselves in the perspective of an Arab or Israeli during a
key event of the AIC. Teacher allows silent time, (5 mins), in the classroom for
students to think/reflect about this.
2. Students then write down their empathetic thoughts, as a person of the past, in
the Y chart handout, with said thoughts organized in either the ‘looks like,’ ‘feels
like,’ and ‘sounds like’ sections of the Y chart handout (distributed by the
teacher).
3. Students then join with a desk/table partner and further discuss this; while
adding to their Y chart the things that their partner thought of, but they didn’t.
4. All students report back to the teacher their responses to the activity.
Activity 10
Fishbone activity
1. Teacher hands out 5 large A2/A1 pieces of paper with a blank fishbone model
on it, at 5 key areas around the classroom
2. Teacher asks students to form 5 equal groups around the classroom, at each
one of the blank fishbone handouts.
3. Students, in each group, are to then discuss the key causes of the AIC between
themselves and then write them down, as a group, using the fishbone model to
organize/direct their historical notes/thoughts into 4 key causes (and the sub-
causes/other information that sprout off from those 4 main causes).
4. Classroom reports back to the teacher at the end of the activity
All in all, differentiating a unit of work, for the learning needs of all students, is critical
if effective teachers want to provide equitable outcomes for all their students;
especially those like our male focus student with mild hearing loss. After all,
“curriculum differentiation, then, is the process of modifying or adapting the curriculum
according to the different ability levels of the students in one class,” by either changing
the content, methods for teaching and learning content, or the methods of
formative/summative assessment (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, 2004, p. 14). Effective teachers differentiating their pedagogy, or
methods of presentation to their students, has great learning benefits for students, as
said students can “then…have different learning experiences and objectives for
[themselves, that better suit their needs,] within our classroom while [teachers are] still
teaching one lesson!” (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, 2004, p. 18). In terms of differentiated curricular pedagogy, when it
comes to the male focus student with mild hearing loss, even doing the slightest
pedagogical change of adjusting your voice to the appropriate level as the teacher,
that he best hears at, does a world of good as, “the level of the teacher’s voice (the
‘signal’)… is essential for adequate speech reception by [students with hearing loss]”
(Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. 266). This improvement in pedagogy by the
teacher is strengthened when students, like this male student, are fortunate enough
to have cochlear implants, as they, “directly stimulate the nerves to the inner ear, thus
bypassing damaged receptor structures in the inner ear itself” (Hyde, Carpenter, &
Conway, 2014, p. 265).
Even the differentiating of the academic content, in itself, inside a curriculum/unit of
work, has been shown to improve the learning outcomes of all learners in the
classroom, as it is clear, the most effective content taught in classrooms, in terms of
student engagement/outcomes, is often learning content that: is meaningful; captures
the students’ needs and interests; considers the learning environment; and offers more
than just learning facts (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, 2004, p. 14). Consideration of the learning environment that the content
is delivered in for this focus student with mild hearing loss, is particularly important in
this regard, as, “the location of the [classroom]…being next to the music room, the
tuck shop, the manual arts section or a major road may not be [some of the] best
acoustic environment[s]” for this student (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. 266).
Especially if the classroom, itself, has objects like large amounts of glass, polished
floors, and whiteboards; as too much ‘echo’ in the classroom often causes “overlap
effects and makes speech seem muffled” for this student (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway,
2014, p. 266). Indeed, doing the simple adjustments to the learning environment, such
as changing the timetabled classroom away from the noisy areas of the school or
having a school noise policy, are both simple ways to change the curriculum for the
benefit of this student (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. 266-267).
 Individual Learning Plan (ILP)
SMART learning outcome: By the end of this lesson, the focus student (a male student
with mild hearing loss) will be able to identify some of the benefits and disadvantages
of a possible two-state solution to the Arab Israeli Conflict, through his recording
of/participation in constructive, positive discussion, alongside his peers, about this said
solution.
Lesson Steps
1. Teacher welcomes class into
classroom, powers up data
projector and writes learning
objectives (for the class as a
whole) up on the whiteboard
2. Teacher delivers short directed
instruction presentation, using
PowerPoint/data projector to
assist them. Teacher uses
presentation to very briefly
recover/reaffirm students’
knowledge of the historical
content that they have covered so
far in this Arab-Israeli Conflict
(AIC) unit of work.
3. Teacher asks students to form
groups of 4-8 and to name their
café/group, in preparation for the
global café learning activity (which
is described in detail earlier in this
paper).
4. Teacher designates to each of the
3-4 groups/cafés a unique
historical topic about the AIC, to
both collaboratively discuss
between themselves and record
those discussions (through one
student in each group, who is the
recorder) - with each group
discussing one of either: The two-
state solution to the AIC; the one
state solution to the AIC; the
short/long term causes of the AIC
in the first place; or the general
chronology of the historical events
of the AIC.
5. All students, every 5-8 minutes,
move randomly to another café to
discuss another topic, except for
the recording students who stay at
the same table/café/topic. The
recording students at each table
inform the new groups/cafés
about what the previous
group/café said about the topic,
before continuing.
6. Students continue these
discussions/change cafés 3-4
Adaption/Strategies Assessment
 During both the directed  The vocal reporting back to the
instruction presentation (lesson teacher, by the male focus
step 2) and the writing of notes student with mild hearing loss,
after the global café activity at the end of the global café
(lesson steps 8-9), the focus
activity, serves as a key
student with mild hearing loss will
have one of their peers with them informal formative assessment
to take notes from the PowerPoint, tool. Indeed, this assessment
in their notebooks for them; or is critical in determining if the
conversely, the peer with normal adaptions/strategies for this
hearing will promise to give the student worked during the
focus student with mild hearing activity and, if so, how effective
loss a copy of their own written it was in improving the focus
notes after the lesson. By doing student’s learning outcomes
this, it allows the focus student to towards historically
fully 100% focus audio visually on
understanding/making
what the teacher is saying, as
students with mild hearing loss, judgements about the two-
like this student, “rely on state solution to the AIC. Or in
information from lipreading and other words, whether, by the
without a note-taker they may end of this lesson, the focus
have great difficulty writing their student has met the learning
own notes and watching the outcomes enshrined in the
lesson at the same time” (Hyde, SMART learning objective
Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p. above.
267-268).
 During the global café activity
(lesson steps 3-6), the focus
student will be differentiated for by
making them the designated
recording student, who is to stay
entirely at the same café
group/table that is
exploring/discussing the two-state
solution to the AIC. To help this
focus student in recording the
conversations, a fellow peer will
stay at their side during the activity
and assist them in writing down
the discussion; while the focus
student pays audio visual
attention to his café peers and
contributes to the
conversation/informs the
notetaking student of things they
should record down. The
notetaking student, with normal
hearing, should also repeat
 times, so everyone discusses anything that other students in the
each topic (bar the recording café have said to the male focus
students) student, if he says to them that
7. Once this global café activity is they have missed what was said.
done, the teacher groups all All of this is great differentiation,
students back together during group work, for this focus
8. Teacher asks each of the student, as “students with hearing
recording students to vocally loss have great difficulty with
inform the rest of the class about group work, so it is important to
what historical information they have some routine within the
have recorded down from the 3-4 group for turn taking…for
group discussions on their topic. indicating who is the present
All students copy down the speaker [and]… another child
resulting information, which the [who] can assist the [focus
teacher writes on the board. student] to keep up with the
9. Once all recording students have conversation” (Hyde, Carpenter, &
shared their records, teacher asks Conway, 2014, p. 267).
other students what information
they can add to each of the topics.
All students record down all the
resulting information about the
AIC.
Conveying information to parents/family
An educator’s role, as an effective teacher, in opening a professional
dialogue/conversation with not only the student, but also the parents/family of this
focus student with mild hearing loss also, cannot be understated. As, after all, parents
play a central role in the learning outcomes of any student with mild hearing loss, as
“highly involved parents were [found to be] positively associated with [their] students’
participation in teaching activities,… [as] such parents may have higher demands
towards [teachers but]… they can be more encouraging [to their child];” meaning
“consequently, their children perform better in school and need less educational
support” (Rekkedal, 2017, p. 188). Such a dialogue is uniquely beneficial for both
teachers and the parents of the focus student, as the sharing of critical information
goes both ways, in that, “parents who establish relationships with their child’s school
provide information and insight on school policies and practices… and [in return]
teachers obtain information about what the parents’ expect from their children and
from the teacher;” which means both parents and teachers are able to more effectively
build their knowledge and skills (i.e. their social capital), (Rekkedal, 2017, p. 188).
In terms of the learning benefits for the male focus student himself, a teacher’s
involvement of his hearing mother, two older hearing siblings and deaf father in the
education process is critical, as family is often the foundation of his learning, in that,
his “[developmental/learning] knowledge at any given time… comes from other people
who provide new information, new behaviors, and new things with which to interact,...
in this sense, the family and peers are major contributors” (Marschark & Hauser, 2011,
p. 55). For example, in terms of further developing this focus student’s social skills
when talking with their peers, an effective teacher must suggest, in their
communication with the student’s mother and deaf father, that they might want to,
“avoid overcontrol and intrusiveness by ‘loosening up’ and letting their [male teenage
child] explore and experiment,” with the world around them, outside of the
schoolgrounds (Marschark & Hauser, 2011, p. 58). Of course, suggestions like this
could be taken in an extremely negative way by the focus student’s parents, but such
a suggestion must be made to these parents in a professional, delicate and unemotive
way; as the reality is “children [with hearing loss] who do not have opportunities to
explore and discover for themselves are likely to become more dependent on their
parents and other adults,” rather than socialize with their peers, which could bring
interdependency problems in this focus student by the time they reach adulthood
(Marschark & Hauser, 2011, p. 57-58). Especially when, during school, children with
hearing loss from deaf families have higher self-esteem than those, like the focus
student, that come from majority hearing families (Marschark & Hauser, 2011, p. 61).
It should also be said that effective communication, between the teacher and the family
of the focus student with mild hearing loss, is also critical in avoiding the socio-
emotionally challenging dinner table syndrome that has been found to be commonly
reported in the experiences of many adolescents with hearing loss (Marschark &
Hauser, 2011, p. 62). In that, because school students, like the focus student with mild
hearing loss, hear “better if they are looking at the [face of the] person who is talking,”
often, in the family environments, this results in these students experiencing dinner
table syndrome where it is “difficult for [them] to follow group discussions in spoken
language because hearing people tend to ‘talk over each other;” resulting in them
having “no idea what their family is talking about [most of the time,] while all are
laughing, connecting, and sharing history” (Marschark & Hauser, 2011, p. 62). In
response to this, as an effective educator, the teacher of this male focus student needs
to suggest to his parents that they must “put forth all effort they can to make sure the
communication environment is visually accessible, [and] not only when addressing the
deaf child” if the socio-emotional wellbeing of their student at school is to be
maintained (Marschark & Hauser, 2011, p. 62).
So, all these reasons make it extremely clear that parent-teacher dialogue, to achieve
the best learning outcomes for this focus student, is not only desirable but necessary;
with there being contact opportunities through email, interviews/meetings, telephone
discussions, report cards and many other ways. Commented [JG1]: This highlighted section of this
university paper serves, in large part, to demonstrate that I,
Reflection on strategies in practice as a professional teacher, are very much pedagogically
aware on the richness that can come with including parents
Student 1: An indigenous female student diagnosed with ADHD and literacy difficulties in the education of their child. This section also further
demonstrates my deep knowledge of how, as teachers, we
Activity: online blog jigsaw activity must always act ethically and confidentially in this process
of including parents/family.
1. Break up the classroom into groups of 4 and number each student (including
the indigenous focus student) from 1-4
2. Students, in each group, are then designated a mini-project historical topic
about the AIC for them to research, through their use of laptops/the internet,
such as the Oslo accords
3. Give each student, in each group, a research task they must research
information about independently, on their own, that relates to the overall
historical topic/mini-project of the group (i.e. the Oslo accords); for example,
student 1 in the group researches Yasar Arafat, while student 2 might research
the role of the Palestinian National Authority, etc.
 4. After all students in each group have both electronically found and recorded
their information about their part of the ‘mini-project,’ all said students in each
group are to come back together and collaboratively synthesize/combine their
information into one big web blog project online, as a team.
The use of technological to research/write about historical evidence, in this History
class learning activity that includes the female indigenous focus student, is no mistake,
as the use of ICT technology has been found by many educators to continually inspire
a great boost in Indigenous students’ literacy skills, in particular (Eady, Herrington, &
Jones, 2010, p. 278). In that, the dedicated practice of this focus student’s low, yet
slowly developing literacy skills in this online blog jigsaw task, using technology to
research historical information, has been said by many educators, teaching literacy in
English to indigenous students, to allow an implementation of “learning activities that
build on both cultural and learner strengths[;]… [with] visual literacies, oral memory
and spatial relations [being] brought to the forefront and used to advantage” (Eady,
Herrington, & Jones, 2010, p. 278). Such a dedicated, enriched learning activity, that
seeks to improve low/developing literacy skills, helps to provide this student with very
important learning outcomes from this said ICT jigsaw activity; especially when it is
remembered that students from indigenous backgrounds, like this focus student, have
“many different dialects of their first language to master (including traditional
languages, creoles, mixed languages, and/or non-standard English) before standard
English is even introduced” (Eady, Herrington, & Jones, 2010, p. 270).
This ICT driven learning task also goes a long way in differentiating for many of the
learning characteristics of ADHD that are shown by this indigenous focus student.
Indeed, the fact that, throughout this learning activity, the focus student has both clear
learning directions throughout, and all her limited attention being ‘focused in’ on
researching information in an independent way, results in quite an efficient
differentiation practice. Especially when one considers that students with ADHD, like
this focus student, in order to learn best and have all their attention focused on a task,
often “need to be placed in a classroom without too many distractions and with explicit
routines” that make the said classroom “a predictable working environment;”
which this learning activity using ICT does well (Hyde, Carpenter, & Conway, 2014, p.
120). Indeed, the indigenous focus student is only ever positively challenged in their
learning, when they must collaboratively work alongside their group members, at the
very end of the activity; which takes into account the educational reality that students
with ADHD, “often fail to pick up on social cues that are important for fluid social
interaction” that, unfortunately, ostracize them from their peers (Hyde, Carpenter, &
Conway, 2014, p. 167-168).
References
Eady, M., Herrington, A., & Jones, C. (2010). Literacy practitioners' perspectives on adult
learning needs and technology approaches in Indigenous communities. Australian Journal of
Adult Learning, 50(2), 260-286. Retrieved from https://search-informit-com-
au.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/fullText;dn=183263;res=AEIPT
Hyde, M., Carpenter, L., & Conway, R. (Eds.). (2014). Diversity, Inclusion and Engagement
(2nd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Marschark, M., & Hauser, P. C. (2011). How Deaf Children Learn: What Parents and
Teachers Need to Know. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
NSW Country Areas Program. (2012). Tools and Strategies. Retrieved from https://cpb-ap-
se2.wpmucdn.com/rde.nsw.edu.au/dist/c/1/files/2014/08/Tools-and-strategies-2lskquh.pdf
Rekkedal, A. M. (2017). Factors associated with school participation among students with
hearing loss. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 19(3), 175-193.
doi:10.1080/15017419.2016.1167771
The State of Queensland. (2016). Education Adjustment Program (EAP) Handbook.
Brisbane, Australia: Author.
The State of Queensland. (2017). Modern History General Senior Syllabus 2019. Retrieved
from
https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/portal/syllabuses/snr_modern_history_19_syll.pdf
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2004). Changing
Teaching Practices: using curriculum differentiation to respond to students’ diversity. Paris,
France: Author.
Appendices
Appendix A

(NSW Country Areas Program, 2012).