In the context of equalizing educational opportunities for all pupils, the concept of common or inclusive education has emerged more clearly in recent years (Kasíková & Straková et al., 2011). Schools accept all children, regardless of physical, intellectual, linguistic, economic and other conditions and prerequisites. The Ministry of Education in its Strategy of the Education Policy of the Czech Republic until 2030 + emphasizes the solution of this situation by using didactic procedures of internal differentiation in the teaching process. Therefore, the main aim of the poster is to present didactic variations of differentiation of teaching tasks with regard to their operational structure in relation to the individual needs and interests of pupils.

Czech research characterizes internal differentiation as dividing pupils in a heterogeneous classroom into smaller homogeneous groups, e.g. according to the level of reading skills (Tieso, 2003, p. 31; Najvarová 2008, p.7-21). The English equivalent is within-class (ability) grouping (Hornby & Witte, 2014, pp. 90-91). Some research studies document that students from different groups do not receive the same learning opportunities. Pupils from a stronger group learn more than pupils from a weaker group (Gamoran, 1995; Hornby, 2014; Oakes, 1986), which may be due to teachers providing different instructional stimuli to pupils (Kasíková & Straková et al, 2011). This is because pupils with better learning outcomes enrich each other, whereas pupils from weaker groups are deprived of this benefit (Dar & Resh, 1986). In international research, the assignment of differentiated tasks in lessons has been shown to serve the purpose of harnessing the potential of each pupil and improving the quality of the educational process of large heterogeneous collectives (Cox, 2008; Doubet & Hocket, 2017; Tomlinson, 2005).

Teachers can differentiate instruction in terms of content, time, methods, and organization (Kratochvílová & Havel, 2011). (Cedrychová, et al., 1992) further add that effective differentiation requires different variations of learning tasks. They should appropriately match the learner's specifics or particular groups of learners (Cedrychová, et al., 1992, p. 46). Holoušová (2002) characterizes learning tasks as a wide range of all learning creative tasks during a teaching unit.

In the Czech research field, there is an absence of research devoted to the differentiation of assignments. Therefore, the poster describes the use of pedagogical means of differentiation of the content of the curriculum, differentiation of the difficulty of the curriculum, differentiation of the scope of the curriculum and differentiation of the temporal aspect of the assigned curriculum through a learning task. The poster further analyses the differentiation of the operational, motivational and evaluative aspects of the learning task in relation to the individual needs of the learners. It analyzes the composition of the assignment differentiating the difficulty of the learning task using Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Needs (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

The optics of the poster's focus is the differentiation of the learning task respecting the ividual peculiarities of the pupils, in the profiling subjects, Czech language and mathematics. It analyses the learning task as an important means of differentiating the pace of learning for pupils with specific learning disabilities. Pedagogical means of differentiating the content of the curriculum for pupils of foreign origin and differentiation in terms of difficulty for pupils with mild intellectual disabilities, but also for gifted pupils. The poster highlights the advantages of natural differentiation (Roubíček, Hošpesová, et al.; 2010). The innovative natural differentiation is that all children in a heterogeneous group receive the same tasks, but the tasks have an interesting potential – they hide different levels of difficulty. This creates a stimulating environment that promotes pupils' interest and motivation in solving the learning task.

I chose a multiple-case study as the research design because it allows for interpretation and description of the situation based on the expressed impressions, feelings, and experiences of teachers and students (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Švaříček, 2014). The respondents were five first grade teachers of varying ages and years of experience from five classes of urban and rural elementary schools in three regions of the country. Teachers were recommended by school administrators and based on interviews conducted with teachers. The research question asked How do teachers use differentiation of learning tasks in relation to students' individual abilities and knowledge? The data was collected through semi-structured interviews. The poster addresses the issue of intrinsic differentiation in teaching. The object of investigation is the operational structure of the learning task, which is represented by differentiation of content, differentiation of scope, differentiation of difficulty and differentiation of the time aspect of the tasks assigned. The focus of the composition and sequence of the learning task assignment was also investigated with a focus on the use of Bloom's taxonomy of learning objectives. The research investigation focused on the possibility of varied work with text and the use of graded tasks in teaching when a stimulating environment exists. We deliberately selected schools in which a school psychologist is present and complements the pedagogical diagnosis of the pupil and collaborates with teachers. After a detailed study of the analyses of the semi-structured interviews, I included participant observation carried out in the form of long-term, systematic and reflective observation of the ways and practices of implementation focusing on the differentiation of motivational, operational, evaluative aspects of learning tasks with respect to Bloom's taxonomy of learning needs. Interview data were first coded through open coding (MAXQDA2022), then reduced to a set of codes as units of analysis at the lowest level of abstraction. The inductively generated codes were then clustered according to meaning under overarching concepts, followed by the creation of subcategories. Within the created categories, data were compared across cases. This created scales that characterized different forms of learning task use to differentiate the content, scope, difficulty, and time of the tasks assigned.

The poster presents the first stage of research, conducted in 2021,2022, in primary schools in 3 regions of the Czech Republic. The research of stage 1 focused on the use of phenomenal differentiated tasks in teaching in grades 1 to 5 of primary school. The poster will be part of the GAUK 2023/2024 project entitled Improving the quality of teaching by involving 10 Prague schools in the implementation of differentiated pedagogical resources in teaching. Differentiated learning tasks in mathematics were given in the third grade of Pardubice Primary School according to the difficulty of the content, using Bloom's taxonomy of learning objectives and employing lower and higher order thinking. In the fourth grade of the Hradec Králové Primary School, differentiated worksheets were used based on the scope of the text in the Czech language. In the extension version of the worksheets, extension questions are given to the students. For example, pupils have to find ungrammatical words or answer comprehension questions. The short version of the differentiated worksheet is simpler and contains easier questions. Using natural differentiation, there was a stimulating motivational environment in the classrooms. The added value in solving the graded problems was the fact that students chose the problems themselves, according to their confidence. Differentiated tasks were absent in grades 2 and 5 in rural schools. The research investigation shows that differentiated learning tasks are used in urban schools, while in rural schools the means of differentiated learning are absent. Interviews with female teachers confirmed that the reason for this is the lack of training devoted to differentiated instruction and support from school management. The research at the theoretical-pedagogical level provided a structured concept for the inclusion of differentiated tasks in the educational process. At the practical-didactic level, it introduces the types of phenomenal differentiated tasks in teaching.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. Cedrychová, V., Raudenský, J., & Krestová, J. (1992). Možnosti diferenciace žáků na základní škole. H & H. Cox, S. G. (2008). Differentiated instruction in the elementary classroom. The Education Digest, 73(9), 52. Dar, Y., & Resh, N. (1986). Classroom intellectual composition and academic achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 351–314. Doubet, K. J., & Hockett, J. A. (2017). Differentiation in the elementary grades: Strategies to engage and equip all learners. Ascd. Fryč, J., Matušková, Z., Katzová, P., Kovář, K., Beran, J., Valachová, I., Seifert, L., Běťátková, M. Hrdlička, F. (2020). Strategie vzdělávací politiky České republiky do roku 2030+. Ministerstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy. Gamoran, A., Nystrand, M., Berends, M., & LePore, P. C. (1995). An organizational analysis of the effects of ability grouping. American Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 687-715. Grecmanová, H., Holoušová, D., & Urbanovská, E. (2002 dotisk). Obecná pedagogika I. Hanex. Hornby, G., & Witte, C. (2014). Ability grouping in New Zealand high schools: are practices evidence-based? Preventing school failure: Alternative education for children and youth, 58(2), 90-95. Kasíková, H., Straková, J., Dvořáková M., Habart T., Chvál M., Janebová E., Krejčová L., Matulčíková M., Rýdl K., Tvrzánová I., Valenta J., Valenta P., Váňová R., Vítečková M. (2011). Diverzita a diferenciace v základním vzdělávání. Karolinum. Kratochvílová, J., Havel, J., & Filová, H. (2011). Analýza školních vzdělávacích programů jako prostředek kvalitativního rozvoje inkluze na 1. stupni ZŠ. Masarykova univerzita. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage. Najvarová, V. (2008). Čtenářská gramotnost žáků 1. stupně základní školy. Pedagogická orientace, 18(1), 7-21. Oakes, J. (1986). Tracking, inequality, and the rhetoric of reform: Why schools don't change. Journal of education, 168(1), 60-80. Roubíček, F. & Hošpesová, A. (2010) Náměty pro přirozenou diferenciaci v matematice na 1. stupni základního vzdělávání: Podnětná prostředí v geometrii. Šeďová, K., Švaříček, R., Sedláček, M., & Šalamounová, Z. (2014). On the way to dialogic teaching: Action research as a means to change classroom discourse. Tieso, C. L. (2003). Ability grouping is not just tracking anymore. Roeper Review, 26(1), 29-36. Tomlinson, C. A., & Strickland, C. A. (2005). Differentiation in practice: A resource guide for differentiating curriculum, grades 9-12. ASCD.