Module 5.1

Implementation Findings: From Theory to Practice

What happens when inclusive language teaching moves from theory to classroom reality?

Between March and September 2025, teachers across Europe implemented SPLENDID scenarios with real students—some with dyslexia, ADHD, visual impairments, and hearing impairments. They worked in diverse contexts: primary and secondary schools, private and public settings, with classes ranging from 7 to 15 students at B1 to B2+ proficiency levels.

This module shares what actually happened in those classrooms—not idealized case studies, but honest accounts of successes, challenges, and the practical adaptations teachers made on the ground.

Teacher Voices

“It was a great experience to try out something new and to see how the students responded to my ideas.”

“All students were interested and motivated to learn.”

“I particularly liked the suggested activities—although I already use some of them in a similar form, others, such as Learning Machine, were completely new to me.”

“Mixed feelings; liked the general idea but noticed quite a few drawbacks… The biggest problem for me was the time limit.”

By engaging with the implementation findings in this module, you will be able to:

  • Recognize patterns of success when implementing inclusive EFL scenarios with students with diverse learning needs
  • Identify concrete strategies that worked across multiple classroom contexts, particularly for students with ADHD, dyslexia, and sensory impairments
  • Anticipate common implementation challenges (time management, simultaneous support for multiple needs, preparation workload) and plan proactive solutions
  • Adapt SPLENDID scenarios based on evidence from actual classroom implementation, rather than theoretical assumptions
  • Apply multi-modal teaching strategies (visual + auditory + tactile) that benefited all learners, not just those with identified disabilities
  • Evaluate your own readiness for implementation and create an action plan tailored to your teaching context

Most importantly: You will see that inclusive teaching is possible, messy, rewarding, and worth the effort.

Before diving into the classroom stories, let’s briefly connect implementation findings to the core principles guiding SPLENDID.

The Willingness-Participation Gap

SPLENDID research identified a critical finding: students with diverse learning needs maintain positive attitudes toward language learning but face significant engagement barriers in traditional classroom environments. This “willingness-participation gap” was confirmed across four European countries.

The question implementation sought to answer: Do UDL principles combined with task-based approaches actually close this gap in real classrooms?

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) + Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT)

UDL Principles (Quick Refresh):

  • Multiple means of representation – present information in varied formats (visual, auditory, tactile)
  • Multiple means of action and expression – allow flexible ways for students to demonstrate learning
  • Multiple means of engagement – tap into diverse motivations and interests

TBLT Principles (Quick Refresh):

  • Language learning through meaningful, goal-oriented tasks
  • Focus on authentic communication, not just language forms
  • Learners actively construct understanding through doing

Why Implementation Evidence Matters

Theory tells us what should work. Implementation tells us what actually works—and under what conditions. The findings in this module reveal:

  • Which UDL principles proved most impactful in practice
  • Where theory meets the realities of time constraints, large classes, and mixed-ability groups
  • How teachers adapted materials creatively when ideal conditions weren’t present
  • What students with diverse learning needs actually experienced and valued

This section presents findings organized thematically—drawing from teacher reports, post-implementation questionnaires, and student feedback. Each theme includes concrete examples showing both successes and challenges.

Theme 1: What Worked Well

Multi-Modal Approaches: The Universal Benefit

Finding: Providing information through multiple channels (visual + auditory + tactile) was the single most consistently successful strategy across all contexts.

What this looked like in practice:

  • Visual: Flashcards, printed texts with dyslexia-friendly fonts (larger, bolded keywords), videos with subtitles, charts, real-life props
  • Auditory: Audio versions of texts, teacher verbal descriptions, video narration, peer reading aloud
  • Tactile/Kinesthetic: Sorting recyclable materials, physical movement activities, hands-on props, “touchable spaces” using body and objects to practice spatial language

📌 Concrete Example: Scenario 11.2: Planet Protectors: Help the Planet Survive!, D4.5 Teachers’ Handbook, p.180

Teacher Michael implemented this scenario with 12 students (3rd grade junior high, including 2 ADHD, 3 dyslexia, 1 simulated visual impairment, 1 simulated hearing impairment).

What he did:

• Provided excerpts about recycling in BOTH audio and visual text formats

• For the animated video, gave detailed verbal descriptions for the student with visual impairment AND clear visual summaries/subtitles for the student with hearing impairment

• Session 3: Hands-on sorting activity with recyclable objects of different textures and shapes

Result:

“The hands-on activity in Session 3, involving sorting recyclable materials, remained highly successful for these students [ADHD], allowing for physical engagement and enthusiastic participation. The three students with dyslexia… responded very positively to the tactile nature of the recyclable objects, an interaction which helped solidify their understanding of new vocabulary and concepts.”

Interactive and Game-Based Tasks: High Engagement for All

Finding: Hands-on, game-like activities were consistently the most engaging—particularly for students with ADHD, but beneficial for all learners.

Most successful game-based activities:

  • “Interactive Ball Game” (Good Practice 9, p. 64, D2.3 Collection of Best practices)– for vocabulary practice – mentioned by multiple teachers as highly effective and popular
  • “Learning Machine”(Good Practice 17, p. 94, D2.3 Collection of Best practices)–  a hands-on vocabulary learning tool that was new to many teachers
  • “Touchable Spaces” (Good Practice 5, p. 36, D2.3 Collection of Best practices)– using body and classroom objects to practice spatial language
  •  

💡 Key Insight: Movement matters for ADHD

“The ‘Interactive Ball Game’ game was the highlight for the students with ADHD, its active and hands-on nature keeping them fully engaged. Anticipation of the game helped maintain focus during the video and reading passage.”

“Some activities were very well received by the restless boys, which I think is great, as it attracted them to English lessons.”

Flexible Output Options: Meeting Diverse Needs

Finding: Allowing students to demonstrate understanding through oral, written, or practical demonstration removed barriers and increased confidence.

What this looked like:

  • Students with dyslexia: Struggled with written exercises but excelled when allowed to respond orally or participate in group discussions
  • Students with visual impairment: Contributed ideas and content verbally for digital poster creation; participated actively in oral discussions and role-plays
  • Students with hearing impairment: Preferred written contributions or visual demonstrations; could fully participate in tactile sorting activities
  • All students: Role-plays emerged as an excellent alternative to traditional written presentations

📌 Teacher’s Adaptation:

“Even though the dyslexic student knew the correct word, he struggled to spell it accurately, affecting his performance. Therefore, after I realized that the process was stressful, I decided to ask him to do the activity orally.” – Teacher Georgia,

“For the brochure, focusing on their strengths (e.g., visual design, oral contributions to content) and using assistive technology for writing was helpful. The role-play allowed them to showcase understanding orally.” – Teacher Michael, 11.3 Scenario: Recycling and Upcycling for the Environment, p. 184, D4.5 Teachers’ Handbook.

Environmental Themes: Authentic Motivation

Finding: Scenarios centered on recycling, climate change, ecosystems, and environmental pollution were generally well-received and provided relevant, engaging contexts for language practice.

Students were already familiar with environmental vocabulary from other subjects and real-world contexts, which boosted confidence and made language learning more meaningful.

“My learners have learned a great deal, they learned how to adapt slogans for their own purposes, the school cleanup for example. But most of all, they were creative and they were able to choose what they wanted to work on as an ad.” – Teacher, post-implementation survey

Strategic Peer Support: When It Works

Finding: Structured peer support was valuable—but required careful management to ensure genuine collaboration rather than one student simply doing work for another.

Successful peer support strategies:

  • Paired grouping (1 blind – 1 non-blind): One student guided another through tactile activities while both engaged with content
  • Assigned roles: Visual describer, note-taker, materials manager—giving each student a clear responsibility
  • Peer reading: One student reads text aloud for a visually impaired peer; both then discuss meaning
  • Face-to-face positioning: For hearing-impaired students, ensuring they could see speakers’ faces clearly

“To face this challenge [sorting materials for blind students], I made groups of two (1 blind-1 non-blind) so that the non-blinds would be able to guide the blind ones throughout the lesson. This way, cooperation skills were also enhanced.” – Teacher Electra

Theme 2: Navigating Challenges

Implementation wasn’t always smooth. Teachers encountered real obstacles—and found creative solutions. Here’s what challenged them most and how they responded.

Time Management: Everything Takes Longer

Challenge: Nearly every teacher reported that activities took significantly longer than planned—sometimes double the anticipated time.

Why activities took longer:

  • Students with diverse learning needs worked at different paces
  • Providing simultaneous visual AND auditory support required extra explanation time
  • Vocabulary needed more time for explanation, often through examples or body language
  • Oral activities (necessary for some students) took longer than written exercises
  • Setting up hands-on materials and transitions between activities added time

Teacher Voices on Time:

“The biggest problem for me was the time limit.” – Multiple teachers

“The gap filling activity took more time than expected due to the fact that two students (one with dyslexia) worked more slowly than others and needed additional time to complete the tasks.”

“I had problems with the learning machine, as I only have two hours a week in the same class. If we started working on it, it would take quite some time.”

“Despite the difficulties the lesson went smoothly mostly because some exercises were oral. The real life props were a bit difficult to be used by the ‘blind’ students, so their partners helped them a lot.”

“The fact that I had my born blind student was challenging so I needed more than 50 min to make the lesson.” – Teacher Electra

How teachers adapted:

  • Spread activities across multiple lessons rather than trying to complete in one session
  • Broke tasks into smaller, manageable chunks with clear stopping points
  • Used visual timers to help ADHD students manage time expectations
  • Pre-prepared materials and rehearsed transitions to minimize setup time
  • Accepted that quality engagement matters more than covering all planned content

Supporting Multiple Types of Learning Needs Simultaneously

Challenge: When classrooms included students with different types of learning needs (e.g., both visual and hearing impairments, or dyslexia + ADHD), ensuring one adaptation didn’t inadvertently create barriers for another was complex.

Specific tensions:

  • Audio-heavy approaches (for visually impaired) sometimes excluded hearing-impaired students who needed visual access
  • Fast-paced, kinesthetic activities (engaging for ADHD) could overwhelm students with dyslexia trying to process written instructions
  • Oral group discussions (accessible for dyslexic students) were hard for hearing-impaired students to follow
  • Providing detailed verbal descriptions for one student while maintaining visual clarity for another required constant dual attention

“Accommodating this combination of sensory impairments brought a complex set of challenges and highlighted the critical importance of multi-modal teaching strategies. Managing dual sensory support: Ensuring that adaptations for one sensory impairment did not inadvertently create barriers for another required constant vigilance.” – Teacher Michael

How teachers adapted:

  • “Dual-channel” approach: Systematically provided both audio descriptions AND visual summaries for all content
  • Layered support: Videos with subtitles + teacher verbal narration + written summaries on board
  • Strategic grouping: Deliberately paired students with complementary needs (e.g., one who could read aloud, one who could scribe)
  • Pre-planning adaptations: Before lessons, specifically mapped out which modality each activity would need for each student
  • Accepted imperfection: Recognized that fully meeting every need simultaneously is aspirational; aimed for “good enough” rather than perfect

Vocabulary and Text Accessibility

Challenge: Students with dyslexia and some students with ADHD found vocabulary difficult and required extensive time for explanation and repetition.

Specific issues:

  • Some video game introductions and definitions were pitched too high (designed for teenagers but used with younger students)
  • Multiple-choice exercises were more accessible than open-ended written tasks for dyslexic students
  • Gap-fill activities created stress for students who knew content but struggled with spelling
  • B2+ level texts were challenging even with audio support; required pairing with strong readers

Teacher Observations:

“The students with dyslexia found it difficult to follow the multiple-choice exercises so I made groups of two so that they were helped by their partners.”

“Liked the general idea but noticed quite a few drawbacks e.g. inconsistency between the level of the intros or definitions (high) and the tasks (low) – words like ‘hot’, ‘water’ or ‘night’ are well-known among seven-year-olds while their explanations are designed for teenagers.”

“The vocabulary was very difficult so I wasted much time to explain what they mean. I placed the dyslexic students in different groups, their partners read the questions and they answered orally.”

How teachers adapted:

  • Pre-taught vocabulary: Introduced key terms before activities using visuals, gestures, and examples
  • Modified text presentation: Larger fonts, bolded keywords, increased spacing, dyslexia-friendly layouts
  • Provided audio versions: Essential for both dyslexic and visually impaired students
  • Switched to oral responses: When written tasks created stress, allowed verbal answers instead
  • Used body language and concrete examples: Physical demonstrations helped convey meaning when verbal explanations fell short
  • Reading rulers and assistive tech: Tools to help students track text more easily

Teacher Preparation Workload

Challenge: Preparing materials for diverse learning needs was highly time-consuming.

What required significant preparation time:

  • Creating audio versions of texts
  • Writing detailed verbal descriptions for visual content
  • Adapting text layouts for dyslexia-friendly formatting
  • Ensuring videos had both subtitles and transcripts
  • Gathering and organizing hands-on materials (recyclables, props, flashcards)
  • Planning how each activity would be adapted for each type of learning need

“Teacher Workload: Preparing and adapting materials for such a diverse group, including creating audio versions, detailed verbal descriptions, visual summaries, and ensuring tech accessibility, is highly time-consuming.” – Teacher Michael

What helped:

  • Viewing preparation as investment: Materials created once could be reused and refined
  • Collaboration with colleagues: Sharing the workload, co-creating scenarios
  • Using text-to-speech tools: Automated audio generation for some materials
  • Starting small: Implementing one well-prepared scenario rather than attempting to adapt everything at once
  • Asking students to help: Enlisting students (especially those without DLN) to create visual aids, record audio, or prepare materials as part of their learning

By the Numbers: Implementation Data at a Glance

This section presents quantitative patterns from the post-implementation survey (14 teachers) and teacher reports. Data is presented in formats ready for infographic creation.

Overall Experience: How Teachers Rated Implementation

Teacher Experience Category

Number of Teachers

Positive/Excellent (“great experience”, “students motivated”)

9/14 (64%)

Mixed (liked some aspects, challenges with others)

4/14 (29%)

Primarily Negative

1/14 (7%)

 

Top Implementation Challenges

Challenge

% of Teachers

Time management / Activities took longer than planned

71%

Vocabulary difficulty / Need for extensive explanation

43%

Supporting multiple types of learning needs simultaneously

36%

Teacher preparation workload

29%

Large class sizes / Managing diverse groups

21%

Student Outcomes: What Teachers Observed

For Students with Diverse Learning Needs:

  • 100% of teachers reported positive engagement from students with DLN
  • 86% noted that students with DLN achieved satisfactory learning outcomes
  • 57% specifically mentioned that students with ADHD were particularly drawn to kinesthetic and game-based activities
  • 43% highlighted creative outputs and presentations from students with DLN

For Students Without Identified Learning Needs:

  • 93% reported that all students understood material better and consolidated knowledge
  • 71% noted that multi-modal approaches benefited ALL learners, not just those with DLN
  • Many teachers noted that students without DLN naturally took on peer support roles

“The outcomes for the learners with DLN and those for the other learners were the same, and that was the point – the learners with ADHD really felt as part of the group and they knew that they can achieve the same results than the others.”

– Teacher, post-implementation survey

Teacher Attitudes: UDL and TBLT Experience

UDL Familiarity:

  • 36% were already familiar with and actively using UDL principles
  • 29% were new to UDL and found it interesting to try
  • 14% felt they should study UDL more deeply to fully master it

Task-Based Approaches:

  • 86% expressed positive views about experiential/task-based learning
  • 57% already incorporated game-based and experiential methods regularly
  • 21% had formal training in TBLT during initial teacher education

Sustainability: Will Teachers Continue Using These Approaches?

Yes, definitely – 11/14 teachers (79%)

Yes, but time is a constraint – 2/14 teachers (14%)

Conditional/Uncertain – 1/14 teachers (7%)

See the 2 short Videos on  Teachers’ Voices where

  1. Mike Dirhalidis, an English language teacher from Platon Schools in Katerini, presents the findings of his school during the implementation stage.
  2. Ulla Leonhardt, a head teacher in a primary school in Heidelberg Germany presents the task based scenario, they developed with the students.

Then, take time to process what you’ve learned from these implementation findings. Use these prompts to connect the evidence to your own teaching context.

Reflective Questions

  1. Recognizing Your Context
  • Think about your current classroom: Which types of diverse learning needs are represented? How similar or different is your context from the implementation classrooms described?
  • What structural factors shape your teaching context? (e.g., class size, available technology, time per lesson, support staff, curriculum constraints)
  • Which success factors from implementation are already present in your teaching? Which would require development?
  1. Anticipating Challenges
  • Looking at the implementation challenges: Which would you most likely face in your context? Why?
  • Time management was the top challenge. What strategies could you use proactively? What would you need to let go of to make space for inclusive approaches?
  • If you have students with multiple types of learning needs, how would you ensure adaptations for one don’t create barriers for another?
  1. Applying Success Strategies
  • Which of the successful strategies (multi-modal approaches, interactive games, flexible output options) could you implement immediately with minimal additional preparation?
  • Which strategies would require significant adaptation or resource investment? Are those investments feasible for you?
  • Think about one specific SPLENDID scenario: How would you adapt it for your students, given what you’ve learned from implementation findings?
  1. Honest Self-Assessment
  • Are you prepared for the reality that inclusive teaching takes more time, especially initially? What would help you sustain effort during challenging moments?
  • Do you have colleagues you could collaborate with to share the preparation workload?
  • What support would you need—from your school, administration, or professional network—to implement inclusive approaches effectively?

Action Planning Prompt

Create Your Implementation Plan

Choose ONE scenario from the SPLENDID handbook that you’d like to try. Then answer:

1. Which specific adaptations will I make based on implementation findings?

(e.g., create audio versions of texts, prepare tactile materials, design flexible output options)

2. What preparation do I need to do?

(e.g., gather materials, create modified texts, coordinate with colleagues)

3. How much time will I realistically need?

4. What challenges do I anticipate, and what’s my plan for addressing them?

(Be specific about likely obstacles and practical solutions)

5. How will I know if it’s working?

(Define observable indicators of student engagement and learning)

Start small. Implement one well-prepared scenario rather than attempting everything at once. Document what happens—both successes and challenges—so you can refine your approach.

Ready to dive deeper? These resources will help you continue learning from implementation evidence and connect with the SPLENDID community.

Deepen Your Understanding

Key SPLENDID Research:

  • SPLENDID Needs Analysis Study (WP2, T2.2) – The “willingness-participation gap” research with 60+ students across Europe
  • Collection of Best Practices in EFL per Disability & CEFR Level (WP2, T2.3) – Evidence-based practices aligned with language skills

Theoretical Frameworks:

  • Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Guidelines – CAST.org
  • Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) Companion Volume – Council of Europe
  • Task-Based Language Teaching (Ellis, R.) – Core principles and implementation

Give Feedback

Your implementation experiences matter. If you try SPLENDID scenarios in your classroom:

  • Contribute to the Open Educational Repository with your adaptations

Moving Forward

Inclusive teaching is not about perfection. It’s about progress, adaptation, and keeping student needs at the center of our practice.

The teachers who implemented SPLENDID scenarios faced real challenges—time constraints, diverse needs, preparation workload. Yet 79% plan to continue using these approaches. Why? Because they saw students engage, learn, and feel included.

You can do this too. Start small. Try one scenario. Adapt it to your context. Learn from what works and what doesn’t. Share your experiences.

Every step toward inclusive teaching matters.