Engaging Blind Student in English Translation Class: A Report on Differentiated Instruction Implementation

English Language Teaching practices in Indonesia have challenged the diversity including cultural background, values, customs, beliefs as well as the disability. As Indonesia ratified CRPD (Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities) and passed the Education ministry number 46 of 2017 about special support for students with special needs, the inclusion of students with disability in higher education is increasing. Implementing differentiated instruction for Inclusive education in English language teaching practices is one of the strategies to fulfill and accommodate students with special needs. This research aims at reporting the implementation of differentiated instruction to increase the engagement of students with visual disabilities in learning English in mainstream class. The participant is a totally blind student who attended English translation class. Employing the qualitative research design, this research documented the differentiated instruction implementation by observation and interview. Implication and recommendation are postulated as resourceful insight to encourage inclusive ELT practices.

Despites of the various disciplines that the students with disabilities learn in college, English is one of compulsory subjects that should be taken by college students in Indonesia Higher Education. In Universitas Brawijaya, the Faculty of Cultural Studies has facilitated numbers of blind students to study language. One of them is studying in Indonesian Language Education and Literature Program. As he should take an English Translation Class as one of compulsory subjects, some challenges and opportunities were found in facilitating him in English Class. Utilizing the principles of Differentiated Instructional strategies, this research elucidated the engagement of Blind Students in English Translation class using two primary data of interview and class observation.

Review of Related Literature English Teaching and Learning for Blind Student
Based on previous research done by (Aslantaş, 2017)stated that there are three critical subjects in the teaching and learning process for students with visual disabilities. The first is Equal treatment means that treating disabled students equally no matter what disability they have, second is auditory input is a way to collect information for students with visual disabilities. For example; in the education side, listening helps more efficient students to learn the material, the third is assistive technology computer and web ______________________________________________________________________________________ 21 Cite this as: 1  technologies help students with visual disabilities to read material. According to (Agesa., 2014)stated that there are some challenges that are faced by teachers in teaching disability students, the first challenge is about student performance in the academic side. This research reported the result of the teacher questionnaire. 80% of teachers said that students with visual impairment are capable of performing academically and were cognitively sound. The second challenge is teachers should provide the special needs in education freely means students can have it for free. 60% teachers strongly agree that free special needs education is important, it will help for proper planning, curriculum and environment for students with visual disability easily access the learning process. The third challenge is that only teachers who were trained can teach visual impairment students, 81% strongly agree with the reason because that is needed technical knowledge to make effective learning. According to (Kirk, S., Gallagher.J.J., Coleman.M.R., 2012) students with visual disability have an effect on students' cognitive and vocabulary development, blind learners had less understanding of words, so they might understand something without fully understanding the concept. They have different concrete experiences compared to sighted students. In learning English, (Lailiyah, Iswahyuni, Lintangsari, 2020)) states that students with no vision will have more difficulties to spell English letters since the inconsistency between sounds and spelling, furthermore, the research postulated that blind learner face many challenging factors in English Spelling, such as different language between L1 and L2, lack of exposure to the word formation, student preferences, and inherent language. The research reported that blind students need to find out his own strategies to help him in spelling. According to (Lintangsari & Emaliana, 2020) students use their other senses to get information, so it means when they lose some senses the other senses become more sensitive. In the other word decreasing function of senses makes the other senses increase their function. (Başaran., 2012) stated that from the teachers' point of view, challenges are lively emerging when teaching English for students with visual disability, first challenge is multiple impairments means that they have many different impairments, some participants mentioned that some students had other impairments such as hearing loss in addition to visual impairment. The second is learning disability means they have less memory to remember the lesson, several students blaming his family problem as the third challenge is family-related problems means they have issues with their own family, the fourth is curriculum. stated that the syllabus is very heavy and means that too much topic to teach in one learning program, the fifth challenge is Time constraints means that they need more time to do teaching and learning processes. As the result (Başaran., 2012) stated a special training is needed for teachers who teach visual impairment students for developing technique and material for target learners. The different challenge faced by (Lintangsari & Emaliana, 2020) the access of material is the format of material could not be read by screen reader, teacher asked the student with visual disabilities to contact the disability support centre to change the format of material but the student cannot access the accessible format in time, because it took time to process the material. The second challenge is the sound letter inconsistently in English language, so the blind learner often makes errors in spelling. The third challenge is the physical environment; the facility of higher education is less comfortable for students with disabilities to learn. The last challenge is that the blind student has less initiative to learn English even though the target learner can access digital material, and also maintains the focus to listen to material so the teacher sometimes calls his name to make sure he is following the class (Lintangsari & Emaliana, 2020)).

Student Engagement in Learning Language
Student engagement can be described as students' who are active and involve participation in learning activities (Cole, 1990) Criteria to declare students engagement in learning language is cognitive, affective and social. Also stated by (Svalberg, 2009) that to make engagement significant are these three important aspects which are cognitive, affective and social. In cognitive engagement students are dictated to do a lot of tasks based on their knowledge capability, using more students centred strategies. Affective engagement is when students use their sense of feeling and emotional to access the lesson. Social engagement related to a student's initiation in the learning process. The previous research done by (Lintangsari, Emaliana, Fatmawati, 2019) reported that both cognitive and affective engagement complement each other. As it highlighted that teacher treatment which is part of cognitive engagement facilitator can compensate the low motivation of students in learning English that influence their affective engagement. The student centred strategy is recommended as a one of effective strategies because it encourages students to think critically and improves students' alertness in studying English. The willingness and purposeful learning of learning English showed by the students also encourages their language learning engagement indicated by the act of the student to find different sources in learning English and to maximize their auditory sense. Moreover, the social factors help the students to benefit their social supports to improve their engagement in learning language such as peer learning to practice their English and to argue their comprehension in a very fair and friendly way.

Differentiated Instruction
Differentiated instruction (DI) attended to help teachers implement Inclusive education, this strategy has been recommended by (Tomlinson, 2013) Differentiated instruction is a strategy for teachers to teach and facilitate students learning based on their variety of needs. The DI strategy that is flexible for teaching method focused on readiness, interest and learning profile. DI helps teachers to maximize potential ability from target learners, in addition DI strategies are effective for special education to fulfil students with disability variety needs. Followed by a goal to maximize student capability on learning. According to (Bešić, L. Paleczek, M. Krammer & B. G. Klicpera, 2016) differentiated instructions are implemented better in heterogeneous classrooms, meaning that a classroom composition is essential part of the teaching and learning process to implement differentiated instruction, and that corresponds to the normal heterogeneity of the student population. The previous study about differentiated instruction was by (Nel, Kempen & Ruscheinski, 2011) about differentiated instruction methods that are used in South Africa in the learning process, which is focused on visuals simulating activities, direct learning activities and the importance of incorporating music. Some special schools already implement a program called Learn not to burn (LNTB). It is a fire safety practice for students that is an adaptation and accommodations from differentiated instructions to students' intellectual disabilities. (Broderick et al., 2005) states that in relation to facilitating students with disabilities, An interactional process and not an empirical, stable fact or conditions. It is recommended to give recommendations instead of modifying one lesson for students with disabilities, the researcher plans to give responsive lessons to differentiate instruction for all students from the outset. This research also provides disability related issues for effectively differentiating instruction in inclusive class means this research discusses labelling students with disabilities in classroom and social justice. This research asks to make a product individually from differentiated instruction to demonstrate what students know and are capable to do, and as the result they said DI is powerful tools that enables teachers to teach inclusive classes and solutions to boost potential skill from students with disabilities.
(Lindner & Schwab, 2020) has investigated the result of progress of differentiated and individualized teaching practices in inclusive classrooms, the criteria of the setting is considering collaboration and teamwork, instructional practices, organizational practices and social/emotional/behavioural practices. They also stated that differentiated and individualized design and simulation of teaching and learning processes is a didactic approach that attempts to ensure educational justice in the sense of a participatory fairness and is linked to all five categories of inclusive teacher practice, along with support for individual needs. As the result shows that differentiated and individualized can be implemented in specific environments, flexibility in curricula, teacher competence and knowledge was the factor of a successful and beneficial program for students with disabilities.
The previous related research stated by (Lintangsari & Emaliana, 2020)the implementing differentiated instruction for inclusive class in higher level education was discussed from the teacher perspective. Thus, the recent research offers clear explanations about the implementation of differentiated instruction in the implementation of inclusive education in English translation class for blind students in University Brawijaya. This paper elaborates the engagement of Blind students in English translation Class as the implementation of Differentiated Instructional Strategies

Methods
It is a descriptive qualitative research which purpose was to define the level of students' pronunciation in pronouncing /g/ sound and the problems that might come within them. In order to understanding the phenomenon, this research was written descriptively. Data collections cover 25 students' who have pronunciation test and questionnaire as well. The data of the research was the result of pronunciation test that had been given to the participants. The test consists of 40 sentences with various /g/ sound. The source of data came from participants' pronunciation which gathered though test. The research participant was fourth semester students of English Language Education Program of Universitas Brawijaya in academic year 2016/2017. The researcher used simple random sampling as the sampling technique. Whereas, there are five classes available. The researcher randomly took five students from each class and therefore the sample were 25 students in total. It was represented 20% out of 127 students.

Research Participant
1 student with visual disabilities participated in this research. He is a totally blind student who studies Indonesian Language Education and Literature in the Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya. He is in third semester and attending English Translation class which was facilitated by a lecturer who implemented differentiated instruction to facilitate him in an inclusive class.

Research Design
It is mixed method research that employed observation and interview data collection and analyzes both quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative phase applied to guarantee the agreement of interobservers by implementing percent agreement and Cohen's Kappa statistical analysis.

Research Instrument
This research used an observation checklist and interview guideline for blind students adjusted from (King, 2005) under the title 11 Practical Ways To Guide Teachers Toward Differentiation. To observe blind students' perspectives on differentiated instruments this research uses an observation checklist. The guidelines consist of 34 questions. Those questions are divided into five sections, they are physical environment, teacher behaviours, student engagement, material or resources, and instructional strategy. This research only focused on instructional strategies, materials/resources and student engagement sections as the instrument, there are several points of indicators and sub-indicators from the observation guide that the researcher replaces, adds, or erased in the order to fit this research needs on the students with disability since the original observation guide form was made for non-disability students. The following points are; the researcher changed the title of this indicator into "Blind Student Engagement", erases two points of "feel respected and emotionally safe" and "uses self-discipline" there were no indicators that were able to measure their points. The indicator itself are; student point of view while studying, teacher behaviors is asking in order to see how lecturer manage the class while monitoring and performing the learning topic for blind students, material or resource are asking to make sure the material that teacher used is accessible for the blind student, the instructional strategy is to dig deeper what is strategy used by lecturer to help achieving blind student competence. Use a variety of assessment tools before, during, and after learning: to know the media used while class activity.
2 Are accessible to students: asking in order to know the material can be used for everyone.
Use a variety of instructional strategies and activities to teach standards: asking in order to know what strategy is used by the lecturer to teach.
3 Support the standards and topic: in order to know the material can help student knowledge based on the topic Meet the diverse needs of learners: asking to confirm the lecturer's awareness about the variety of student needs. 4 Are age-appropriate: asking in order to know the material must be suitable for the university level.
Engage students in various flexible grouping designs: asking to know lecturer strategy in grouping discussion section 5 Are up-to-date: to know the material should be the newest one.

Use centers and/or stations for
individual and small group instruction: to know the strategy used by the lecturer to inform individuals or small groups.

6
Include appropriate reference sources and materials: the resources of material should be valid.
Engage students with projects and/or problem-solving activities.: asking in order to confirm that lecturer strategy for students in problem solving knowledge.

Data Collection
The data are collected through observations from two meetings of English Translation Class and the interview was conducted in the last meeting. The focus of the data is elaborating the detail on the implementation of differentiated instruction strategy from blind students' perspective in English Translation Class. The observation was held two times on November, 21 st 2018 for the first meeting and November, 28 th 2018 for the second meeting. The English Translation class begins at 02.40 and ends at 04.20 P.M. There are more than 20 students in the classroom.Two independent observers involved in this research to maintain the objectivity of observation results.

Interobserver Agreement
The interobserver agreement was tested using two statistical testing, the first one is the percent agreement and the second one was Cohen's Kappa statistics.

Percent Agreement
The percent agreement was measured as percent agreement among observers. The first step of finding the percent agreement of the interobserver was by converting the observation response into numbers viz. 3 for always, 2 for sometimes and 1 for little. Second step was by finding differences between the two observers' score by giving 0 (zero) points for similar scores and gave 1 for different score. The two observers scores was subtracted and counted the number of zeros then divided it by the number of variables. Further, the statistical calculation is directly interpreted as the percent of data which are correct (McHugh, 2012). The matrix of percent agreement calculation of each observation displayed in table 3  for the first observation and table 4 for the second observation. Based on the percent agreement calculation, the first observation agreement is 75%. The two observers agreed on variable 1, 3 and 4 while they responded differently in variable 2. variable 1 is exhibits on-task behavior while working alone means the target learner showed actions to do his task that was given by the lecturer alone, variable 3 is works on their individual knowledge or ability means the blind student works based on his experience and knowledge to finish the task.  Based on the calculation, the second observation's percent agreement was 50%. The two observers agreed on variable 2 and 4 but they respond differently on variable 1 and 3. variable 2 works effectively in small groups means the target learner showed active participation while grouping sections, variable 4 uses materials/resources on the student's own level of success means the blind student uses material or resources that are beneficial to the related task. Based on the percent agreement on instructional strategy implemented by the lecturer in first observation was 71%, 5 variables were shown agreed by the two observers which are variable 2,3,4,5, and 7. They have different observation results on variable 1, and 6 . The result of the second observation was 42% which are variable 3,5, and 7 was agreed by the two observers, different responses by two observers in variable 1,2,4, and 6. Based on the percent agreement on materials or resources, the first observation indicated 66% of variables agreed by two observers, variable 1,2,5, and 6, the two observers responded differently in variable 3 and 4. The second observation has 100% percent agreement between the first and the second observers which means the variable 1,2,3,4,5, and 6 was agreed by two observers.

Cohen's Kappa Statistical testing
Cohen's Kappa was operated to ensure the interobserver agreement. Among other statistical testing, Cohen's Kappa is highly used to test a interrater reliability that involves two raters with range from -1 to  Table 3 showed the interpretation of Kappa.

Differentiated Instruction implemented by lecturer
The differentiated instruction implemented by the lecturer can be seen from the class observation on dimension instructional strategies and materials/resources used by the lecturer while teaching English translation class. These parts elaborated the differentiated instruction based on those two dimensions.

= Always 2 = Sometimes 1= little
Based on observation results of instructional strategies the first observation in the first meeting revealed that several indicators were done in the activity in the class, the first meeting was with the teacher centre, and the lecturer gave explanation about the material. The second observation was about the grouping section, discussing about the assignment from the last meeting.
The first indicator uses a variety of assessment tools before, during, and after learning is to know the media used while class activity. The lecturer used many kinds of assessment tools such as Google classroom which is online-based for the blind student and paper-based for non-disability students can be categorized as differentiated instruction done by the lecturer.
The second indicator uses a variety of instructional strategies and activities to teach standards: asking in order to know what strategy is used by the lecturer to teach, the instruction was given by lecturer was clear and for all students, and after the lecturer give explanation the lecturer directly give open discussion such as pop-up question to re-explain the material to the target learner in order to monitoring the blind student understand about the material this is differentiated instruction that implemented by the lecturer also this is related to the third indicators.
The third indicator is that the lecturer is aware about diverse needs of students especially for disability and non-disability students, based on the explanation before it is a proof that lecturer is aware about the different treatment for every student the next indicator was shown in the next meeting. Based on the second observation in the second meeting.
The fourth indicator is engaging students in various flexible grouping designs: asking to know lecturer strategy in the grouping discussion section, the grouping section was flexible means students can choose their partner freely means lecturer uses this indicator as strategy for teaching and learning activity, this is related to the fifth indicator.
The fifth indicator as student centre instruction individually and in the small group. The target learner was sat with his group and the differentiated instruction done by the lecturer is when the lecturer comes and makes sure the blind student can give active participation and get the information clearly.
The sixth indicator uses centers and/or stations for individual and small group instruction: to know the strategy used by the lecturer to inform individuals or small groups, this indicator was seen when the lecturer gave related questions about the problem faced by students, this indicator was instructed to all students.
The last indicator presents students with choices in learning activities: to know the strategy given by the lecturer about the activity whether they have a choice or not, this indicator was applied by all students after the lecturer's explanation for answering the assignment in the second meeting.

= Always 2 = Sometimes 1= little
The first indicator includes a variety of reading levels that are related to the subject or topic: means the kind of level to fit every student's capability in reading to related topics. the level of material is the same for all students, and every student is given the same material from the lecturer without a different level of reading ability. The material used in this class is accessible for every students The second indicator are accessible to students: asking in order to know the material can be used for everyone. categorized as the differentiated instruction given by the lecturer, because the material was uploaded in Google Classroom, in order to be accessible easily by the blind student so the target learner can use screen-reader application to help him understand the information.
The third indicator supports the standards and topic: in order to know the material can help student knowledge based on the topic, this indicator can be noticed by seeing the standard topic of the study. The lecturer applied to use the correct material as standar topics for students.
The fourth indicators are age-appropriate: asking in order to know the material must be suitable for the university level. and the fifth indicator is up-to-date: to know the material should be the newest one. These indicators were connected, because the book is from the expert and in appropriate age with up to date edition. The last indicator includes appropriate reference sources and materials: the resources of material should be valid. The sources were well-verified. when the lecturer give explanation about the material in form off paper-based or power point, the lecturer used differentiated instruction with verbally give brief explanation about the material, aslo when it there is a picture or diagram in the material, even though the blind student was sat around his group partner the lecturer understand the different needs of target learner

Blind Student's Engagement
This part elaborates the results of class observations which was done by two independent observers. The observations result has been statistically calculated using percent agreement and Cohen's Kappa Statistics to ensure the reliability of the interobservers. This part descriptively explicated the results of the class observation based on two observers and interobserver agreement. Table 6 illustrated the agreement of the two observations of the two observers.

3= Always 2 = Sometimes 1= Little
As seen in table 12, the first observation showed a 75% percent agreement with Kappa value 0.500 that indicate moderate agreement, the two observers agreed that in the first observation, the blind student always did the 3 of 4 indicators such as exhibit on-task behaviour while working alone, works on their individual knowledge or ability levels, and sometimes uses materials/resources on the student's own level of success. While the second observation showed a 50% percent agreement with Kappa value 0.200 that indicate moderate agreement, the two observers agree that in the second observation, the blind students did 2 of 4 indicators such as works effectively in small group which is different in the first observation that show more disagreement and uses material/resources on the students own level of success indicates agreement.

______________________________________________________________________________________ 33
Cite this as: 1  Based on the observation result in the class the first meeting, both observers agreed about the first indicator, both of them stated that the target learner did his individual work well. The second indicator disagreed, the first observer stated that even though the blind student did his work well in small group discussion as the result, he does not really show teamwork since the group decided to divide work to individual work, different from the second observer that stated the blind student was actively working in a small group. The third indicator was agreed by both observers, both of them observed that the blind student worked individually based on his own knowledge. The fourth indicator, both of the observers agree that the blind student sometimes uses related material or resources but less valid. The result of observation of the fourth indicator was less because the blind student sometimes uses materials or resources when he cannot find the answers based on his individual knowledge, means the use of material or resource is not the first option from the blind student, he depends on his own knowledge.
The second meeting, the observers showed disagreement as a result from the first indicator. The both observers stated the blind student did his work well but the second observer gave additional statement that the blind student got sleepy during the class. The second indicator was stated to agree by both observers because they see the blind student has active and cooperative participation during the small group work. The third indicator was stated to disagree as the result, the first observer stated that the blind student got a lot of help from his partner during the class activity, but the second observer stated that the blind student used his own knowledge to give opinions about something. The fourth indicator was agreed by both of observers but the result was less from the first meeting, the blind student rarely used material or resource in his activity.

Interview Result
In the opening session of the class, the first indicator deals with the physical environment. The participant stated that the opening session class is always fine, no high pressure or to relax situations. There is no special treatment from the teacher or his friend or peer supporter provided by the disability support center (PSLD). Before the class start participant was commonly asked by his friend to choose whether he wants to sit in the front side or back side, the participant said it is up to them, mostly his friend choose to sit with him in front side, genuinely whether in front or back side it really does affect the blind student, because he can understand and listening to the lecturer clearly. When the class starts to have a group discussion, the blind student no longer needs to move around to find his group because his group friend always comes to him.
The second indicator is lecturer behavior, The blind student learns about the lesson next week from the lecturer's lesson plan and asks his clever friend. The first obstacle found in class session is when the lecture explains the material or slide, the lecture always explains and describes what is in the slide or presentation such as a picture, diagram or anything, the subject is more easily understood when it has real shape or touchable than have to imagine what it looks like, because what the participants imagined sometimes was different to the fact. Feedback is always given whether it is in the form of verbal or nonverbal such as a feedback in Google Classroom after the class.
The third indicator is the materials/resources the next obstacle stated by the blind learner is when the lecturer provides the material such as a soft file book or e-book, but could not be read by screen reader or supporting application because the format of the lecturer share is in the form of scan paper or pictures. Blind learner stated that he has a lack of vocabulary and knowledge to understand English the solution that he provides is by asking his classmate that he knows she/he has better knowledge in English.
During this translation class in the meeting 2, the fourth indicator is the instructional strategy. The participant got several differentiated instructions from the lecturer. When a teacher giving a task to write to the blind student gets different treatment or instruction that the blind student does not have to write, he can submit it in the form of voice recordings or audio in Google Classroom. Based on the result of point of view from blind students this strategy is effective and beneficial for him, the blind learner gathering information and material to fulfill his knowledge in English translation class according to his ability, readiness and interest.

Discussion
Based on the result above, this study finds the Differentiated Instruction is beneficial for the target learner, the blind student and the lecturer in the way of teaching in the class. For the blind student can access the information and understand the material easier based on his ability, interest, and readiness, and for the lecturer this strategy can accommodate blind and non-blind students with their variety of needs. This result strengthens by (Tomlinson, 2013) statement that Differentiated Instruction supports teachers in maximizing students' capability in students' readiness, interest and learning profile as the goal of his research.
In the process of taking observation and interview results the subject blind learner did his work or activity in English translation class by himself or independently, even though the blind learner still has participation and is being active in group discussion. On the other world when finding the result the subject has low ability and knowledge in understanding English, strengthened by his interview result that he has low ability in English, even though he is already learning English since elementary school, the blind learner stated he uses Google Translate a lot during the English translation class. Related with the theory of (Kirk, Gallagher, Coleman., 2012) that visual impairment influences the student's language learning. This became the heaviest obstacle for the subject because in Indonesia English is taking part as foreign language, meaning we do not use English for everyday communication.
The material was not less accommodating to students' needs because the material was not given in the form of Differentiation, for blind students the martial less accommodates students' ability. The level of reading material is the same as the level complexity. It happens because the lecturer has a lack of the time faced at the very beginning of semester and ended up at pre-assessment also affecting the mapping of students' reading level, which is missed as the result. The reading material source also limited, it mostly was in the intermediate levels since the English translation class discussed academic writing and journal. The instructional strategy, the blind students got helped by having different instructions given from the lecturer. The differentiation instruction was given in the instruction to the use of media for blind and non-blind students. The differentiation on media was given in the form of on-line as audio for blind students and off-line as written form for non-blind students.
Based on the observation checklist and interview, first meeting observation and second meeting observation have different treatment or differentiated instruction, the first activity was teacher centered which can engage blind student better than second observation, because all of instruction was explained by the lecturer, just several pop-up questions for the target learner. The second activity was a grouping section even though the lecturer monitored each student by reviewing the assignment from the previous meeting. Differentiated instruction was used in forms of media such as Google Classroom in the form of online based instruction for blind student and paper-based for non-disability students, in order to achieve their variety of needs for the accessible information material. In indicators of question in the observation checklist and interview guideline show that, first indicators; the blind student can achieve teacher expectation on individual tasks in the first meeting, the second meeting was discussed from previous assignment so it is not really engaged blind student. For second indicators; the grouping capability blind student shows more engagement in the second meeting, proven by both observers agree about the target learner works effectively in grouping, because the first meeting the grouping section was less than the second meeting. For third indicators; individual knowledge blind student engaged better in the first meeting stated by the observer that the blind student uses his own knowledge to answer the questions, the second meeting blind student was less using his own knowledge because he was in a group discussion and got help from his group partner. The last indicators in observation checklist and interview questions; the blind student using material/resource to answers and following the class, but sometimes the blind student used the material/resource that is less valid, because the blind students depends in his individual knowledge and partner group, even though the material was provide by lecturer is accessible and the newest also related to the topic.
From the observation result compared to the interview data result, the blind student engagement was well engaged, but sometimes he got sleepy during the class, the material was put in online-based class and the topic was related with students' life. The differentiated instruction strategies were used in the form of media learning to accommodate students' variety of needs whether for blind students or for nonblind students.

Conclusion
This research find that differentiated instruction is successful to fulfill the target learner the blind student needs, differentiated instruction was implemented in English Translation class in non English department it is quite challenging, based on the results of interview, the blind student has low ability on English language, but it help a lot with implementing differentiated instruction, lecturer given different treatment to the target blind student learner, to make him get the information and knowledge same as non-disability students. From the lecturer's side when implementing the differentiated instruction the blind learner engagement was good based on his ability to understand English in non english department.