Differentiated teaching features prominently in European education policy as a key pedagogical approach for addressing learner diversity in general education classrooms (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2014; UNESCO, 2017). Policy discourse typically presents differentiation as an inclusive strategy that accommodates diverse learning needs within mainstream settings. However, despite its centrality in policy frameworks, limited empirical evidence exists regarding how differentiated teaching is understood and enacted in practice when classrooms include students with Autism Spectrum Condition (ASC). In particular, little is known about how the presence of students with ASC reshapes teachers’ pedagogical reasoning and enacting, professional judgement, and everyday classroom practices.

This paper demonstrates that general education teachers in Cyprus experience notable changes in how they interpret and implement differentiated teaching when students with ASC are in mainstream classrooms. The key finding is that differentiation is not uniformly applied; instead, it becomes a practice shaped by teachers’ professional judgement and context, influenced by institutional and policy factors. These results challenge common policy views that consider differentiation a straightforward intervention for inclusion.

The study finds that, when teaching students with ASC, teachers report enacting differentiation differently and with specific conditions. They adjust teaching methods focusing more on behaviour management, and voice greater concerns about accountability. This shift from a generally flexible and adaptive approach is central: teachers report that the presence of students with ASC leads to more structured, less spontaneous differentiation than in other general education contexts.

Teachers report increased uncertainty in managing behaviour, setting appropriate academic expectations, and balancing inclusive intentions with accountability demands in classrooms that include students with ASC. Under these conditions, differentiated teaching becomes increasingly oriented towards managing classroom order and perceived risk. This shift is accompanied by greater reliance on institutional structures, formal procedures, and specialist support, which further reshape the scope and purpose of differentiation in practice. As a result, differentiation is no longer primarily enacted as an inclusion-oriented pedagogical approach but is reconfigured in more constrained and conditional ways.

These shifts do not indicate resistance to inclusion or negative attitudes toward students with ASC. Instead, they show how differentiated teaching is renegotiated due to policy ambiguity, limited preparation, and accountability pressures in general education (Florian, 2014). In Cyprus, these trends are further explained by recent national policy developments. Despite official support for inclusion, Cyprus still runs parallel mainstream and special education systems under separate legislation. This separation leads to unequal resources and perpetuates ableist views, shaping how inclusion unfolds in classrooms.

In examining differentiated teaching when students with ASC are present, this paper directly challenges policy narratives that frame differentiation as a simple, universally effective solution to inclusion. It argues that differentiated teaching is fundamentally reshaped by structural, institutional, and policy factors, and contends that meaningful inclusion depends on addressing these underlying conditions. While the study is based in Cyprus, its findings and analysis contribute to broader debates on the complexities of inclusive teaching and teacher professionalism across diverse educational systems.

Research Design This study adopts a qualitative research design to examine how general education teachers conceptualize and enact differentiated teaching, and how this practice is reshaped when students with ASC are present in mainstream classrooms. A qualitative approach is particularly suited to the study’s focus on teachers’ pedagogical reasoning, professional judgement, and sense-making processes, which are central to understanding inclusive practices as context-dependent and socially situated (Braun & Clarke, 2021; Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011). Participants and Context The study was conducted in Cyprus and involved general education teachers working in mainstream elementary schools across the country. Participants were selected based on their experience teaching in general education classrooms that include, or have included, students with ASC. This sampling strategy ensured that participants could reflect comparatively on differentiated teaching across classroom contexts. The Cypriot education system, characterized by the parallel operation of mainstream and special education under separate legislative frameworks, provides a particularly relevant context for examining how inclusive pedagogical practices are negotiated in practice. Data Collection Data was collected through semi-structured interviews, providing both consistency and flexibility for participants to elaborate on salient issues (Kvale, 2009). The interview protocol addressed teachers’ conceptualizations of differentiated teaching, accounts of routine classroom practices, perceptions of changes related to the inclusion of students with ASC, and the institutional and policy contexts influencing pedagogical choices. This method was selected to elicit in-depth, nuanced perspectives on uncertainty, responsibility, and accountability, elements that are often underrepresented in more rigid research designs. Data Analysis The analysis followed a comparative and interpretive approach. Content, thematic and discourse analysis was applied to the data obtained so that, teachers’ accounts of differentiated teaching in classrooms with students with ASC be directly compared to their accounts from classrooms without students with ASC. This enabled the identification of qualitative shifts in pedagogical reasoning, priorities, and enactment when teaching students with ASC compared with those without. Differentiated teaching was treated not as a technical instructional method but as a context-sensitive practice shaped by classroom complexity, behavioural demands, institutional expectations, and policy pressures (Göransson & Nilholm, 2014). The analysis sought to generate analytically transferable insights rather than statistical generalizations. Ethical Considerations Ethical approval was secured prior to data collection. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and participant confidentiality and anonymity were maintained throughout the study.

This study is expected to show that, though widely promoted in European education policy as an inclusive approach, differentiated teaching changes substantially in practice when students with ASC are in mainstream classrooms. The findings indicate that differentiated teaching is not stable or uniformly inclusive. Instead, teachers reshape it based on professional judgement, contextual constraints, and institutional expectations. A key finding is that the presence of students with ASC leads teachers to shift from flexible, adaptive differentiation to a more cautious, structured approach. In practice, teachers often focus on behaviour management and procedural compliance rather than on differentiation, which entails modifying learning goals, content, and procedures. This prioritization reflects teachers' uncertainty about expectations and accountability. The study does not see these shifts as negative attitudes towards ASC students. Instead, teachers renegotiate differentiated teaching in the face of unclear policies, limited training, and accountability pressures. In Cyprus, parallel mainstream and special education systems make these issues stronger. This reinforces inequalities and shapes responsibility and support. As a result, differentiation often serves as risk management rather than inclusion. The study contributes to broader debates on inclusive education. It challenges simple policy ideas that present differentiated teaching as a straightforward or universal solution. The findings underscore the need to examine the structures, institutions, and policies that shape classroom practice. More broadly, the study highlights that inclusion is a context-dependent, negotiated practice. It is not just a technical solution or individual teacher trait. Although this study is based in Cyprus, its conclusions go beyond one country. The tensions between policy goals, differentiated teaching, and classroom realities are evident in many European and international education systems. These systems are facing more student diversity and greater accountability. The study offers insights into the challenges of inclusive teaching and teacher professionalism in general education classrooms.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. 2014a. Five Key Messages for Inclusive Education. Putting Theory into Practice. [city: Odense]: European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. Florian, L. (2014). What counts as evidence of inclusive education? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29(3), 286–294. Florian, L., & K. Black-Hawkins. (2011). Exploring Inclusive Pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal 37(5): 813–828. Göransson, K., & Nilholm, C. (2014). Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings–a critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European journal of special needs education, 29(3), 265-280. Kvale, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage. Unesco. (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education. Unesco.