There has been a lot of confusion over recent years about how these both stand alone and overlap. Here are my thoughts on each concept and how these concepts can be practically applied in school.

Let’s start with my definitions:

Adaption
Adaption is the planned and responsive adjustment of teaching approaches, resources and strategies to reduce barriers to learning so that most pupils can access the same learning objective. It involves anticipating need at the planning stage and making real-time adjustments during lessons, without changing the intended outcome. Adaption is the foundation of inclusive teaching and is underpinned by ongoing assessment and reflection. Sometimes the outcome may need amending after trying the adaption.

Scaffolding
Scaffolding is the temporary support provided to help pupils access learning and achieve an objective they could not yet complete independently. It may include modelling, visual supports, chunking, prompts or structured guidance. Scaffolding is dynamic and should ideally be gradually reduced as pupils’ understanding and confidence develop, with the aim of increasing independence rather than creating reliance.

Differentiation
Differentiation is the intentional modification of learning objectives, tasks or curriculum pathways for pupils who cannot reasonably access the same objective as their peers, even with adaption. It is planned, purposeful and used when learning would otherwise be inaccessible or inappropriate. Differentiation ensures learning remains meaningful and achievable, rather than forcing pupils to meet objectives that do not reflect their developmental or emotional needs.

Personalisation
Personalisation is the design of learning around an individual pupil’s specific needs, strengths and priorities, often as part of a longer-term or highly individualised pathway. It may involve bespoke outcomes, alternative curricula or specialist approaches and is commonly used where pupils are working significantly outside age-related expectations. Personalisation places the individual, rather than the curriculum, at the centre of decision-making. Children who have a personalised curriculum, are likely to also be working on The Engagement Model.

Further Discussion

Adaptive teaching forms the foundation of an inclusive classroom. It is about adjusting teaching approaches so that pupils can access learning, rather than expecting pupils to adapt themselves to a fixed method of delivery. It moves away from a one-size-fits-all approach and recognises that pupils arrive with different strengths, needs and starting points.

At its heart, adaptive teaching is about flexibility. Teachers continually assess how pupils are engaging with learning and make adjustments based on what they see. This might include changing the pace, rephrasing explanations, offering alternative ways to record learning, or adjusting how support is deployed. The intention is always to increase access and participation.

Adaptive teaching is underpinned by the assess, plan, do, review cycle. Ongoing assessment allows gaps or misconceptions to be identified early, enabling timely adjustments within lessons and better-informed planning for future learning. This cycle ensures teaching evolves rather than repeating the same barriers lesson after lesson.

Planning adaptations – not just reacting

One of the most common misunderstandings I have seen around adaptive teaching, is the belief that adaptations should only happen in the moment. While responsiveness during lessons is important, adaptive teaching should never be reduced solely to improvisation (although adaption ‘on the hop’, while teaching, is also important).

Adaptations need to be planned. Teachers anticipate likely barriers during the planning stage and prepare adjustments in advance. This might include adapted resources, scaffolded tasks, key vocabulary lists, sentence starters, or pre-teaching opportunities.

This is matters particularly when LSAs are involved. Adapting on the fly often leaves support staff trying to create solutions in real time without preparation or clarity. That is neither fair nor effective. Clear planning, shared expectations and training in strategies such as chunking and dual coding make adaptive teaching workable for everyone in the room.

The strongest adaptive practice combines proactive planning with responsive teaching. One without the other is incomplete. Of course, there is also a caveat of need in class vs resources. If the need is high and staff ratios low, providing effective adaptation for all, is increasingly challenging.

We also forget that adaption is not a new concept in education, it has been in the teaching standards for many many years!

Differentiation – still valid, still necessary

Adaptive teaching and differentiation are closely linked, but they are not the same thing. Adaptive teaching is dynamic and responsive to what is happening in the classroom. Differentiation tends to be planned in advance and targeted at specific pupils or groups.

I have heard of instances where ‘differentiation’ has been labelled as a ‘dirty word’ by some settings , especially when the term ‘adaption’ became more popular. This narrative has often been driven unnecessarily by Ofsted comments, leading some staff to believe that differentiation is no longer acceptable practice. This has caused considerable confusion and, in some cases, meant that children are left with poor adaptive practices which have defaulted back to ‘differentiation by outcome,’ where everyone does the same thing with varying degrees of success.

Differentiation has not disappeared. It remains an essential part of inclusive practice.

When differentiation is appropriate

Differentiation is necessary when a pupil cannot reasonably access the learning objective, even with adaptation. This might be because they are significantly below age-related expectations or because SEMH needs prevent them from engaging with the curriculum in the same way as their peers.

In these situations, insisting on the same objective is not inclusive. Differentiation may involve a different objective, a modified curriculum, or a more personalised pathway. For some pupils, this might align with approaches such as the Engagement Model.

Differentiation is not about lowering expectations. It is about ensuring learning is meaningful, achievable and appropriate for the individual.

Overlap between adaptation and differentiation

Differentiation is, in many ways, a form of adaptation. The two overlap significantly, and both have a place within effective teaching. It is entirely appropriate to use adaptive teaching for most pupils and differentiation for those who need something more personalised.

if anyone suggests that differentiation is no longer valid, please send them to this blog!

Scaffolding – the mechanism that makes it work

Scaffolding underpins both adaptive teaching and differentiation. It is the support structure that allows pupils to access learning at their current level and move forward from there.

I often describe scaffolding as stabilisers on a bike. You would not remove them too early, but you would not leave them on forever either. The goal is independence, even if that includes a few wobbles along the way.

Scaffolding within adaptive teaching

In adaptive teaching, scaffolding enables pupils to work towards the same learning objective, even if they need different levels of support. The challenge remains consistent, while the support varies.

Scaffolding might include visual supports, modelling through think-alouds, sound buttons, structured prompts, sentence starters, or guiding questions. The key principle is that scaffolding supports thinking rather than replaces it.

Scaffolding should always be dynamic. As pupils gain understanding and confidence, support should be gradually (and carefully) reduced – I have worked for school leaders who have removed it all at once because things were ‘going well’. Needless to say, they didn’t go well for long!

Scaffolding within differentiation and personalisation

When pupils are working on differentiated or personalised objectives, scaffolding is still essential. Tasks may need to be broken down into smaller steps, information chunked, or routines made explicit. Please see my blog on the hybrid inclusion model; where personalisation and in class adaption meet.

The aim remains the same – to provide the right level of challenge alongside the right level of support.

The Engagement Model

The Engagement Model sits firmly within personalisation rather than adaptation or whole-class differentiation. It is used when pupils are not engaged in subject-based learning and when the priority is not curriculum coverage but meaningful engagement, communication and interaction. For these pupils, learning is highly individualised and rooted in their unique developmental profile, rather than age-related expectations or subject-specific objectives. The Engagement Model supports teachers in identifying how a pupil engages with learning across areas such as exploration, realisation, anticipation, persistence and initiation, allowing provision to be shaped around what genuinely supports progress for that individual. In this way, it provides a structured, evidence-informed framework for personalisation, ensuring that learning remains purposeful, assessable and ambitious, even when it sits outside traditional curriculum models.

Engagement Model is statutory for pupils working below the level of the national curriculum and not yet engaged in subject-specific study, meaning schools are required to use it as the appropriate assessment approach for these learners.

Bringing it all together

Adaptive teaching, differentiation and scaffolding are not competing concepts. They work together. Adaptive teaching provides the inclusive foundation, differentiation ensures appropriateness when adaptation is not enough, and scaffolding makes both possible. When ‘in-class’ support is not working or not appropriate, then personalisation and The Engagement Model is the next step.

Used thoughtfully and intentionally and with SENCo support, these approaches allow teachers to meet pupils where they are while still moving them forward. When scaffolding is removed at the right time, pupils are left with confidence, competence and independence – not because support was withheld, but because it did exactly what it was meant to do.

Thanks for reading,

Lynn