35 Years on the Road from Research to Practice: A Review of Studies on Four Content Enhancement Routines for Inclusive Subject-Area Classes, Part I

IF 1.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Learning Disabilities Research & Practice Pub Date : 2021-07-12 DOI:10.1111/ldrp.12258
Jean Bragg Schumaker, Joseph B. Fisher
{"title":"35 Years on the Road from Research to Practice: A Review of Studies on Four Content Enhancement Routines for Inclusive Subject-Area Classes, Part I","authors":"Jean Bragg Schumaker,&nbsp;Joseph B. Fisher","doi":"10.1111/ldrp.12258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article is the first part of a two-part article focusing on the 35-year journey of a team of researchers as they navigated the research-to-practice road related to the development of the Content Enhancement Routines, instructional routines to be used during inclusive subject-area instruction. Part I tells the story of the first half of that journey and highlights the original validation research studies that were conducted on four Content Enhancement Routines: the Concept Mastery Routine, the Concept Comparison Routine, the Concept Anchoring Routine, and the Question Exploration Routine. Each study utilizes some type of experimental research design to determine the effects of teachers’ use of the routine on the test performance of subgroups of secondary students within inclusive classes. The subgroups included students with disabilities and students without disabilities—high achievers, normal achievers, and low achievers. In all of the studies, the students who participated in the instructional routine earned significantly higher test scores than students who participated in a standard lecture/discussion lesson. Additionally, where significant differences were found, the performance of each subgroup of students that participated in the instructional routine was significantly higher than the performance of their paired subgroup that participated in the lecture/discussion lesson.</p>","PeriodicalId":47426,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ldrp.12258","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disabilities Research & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ldrp.12258","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article is the first part of a two-part article focusing on the 35-year journey of a team of researchers as they navigated the research-to-practice road related to the development of the Content Enhancement Routines, instructional routines to be used during inclusive subject-area instruction. Part I tells the story of the first half of that journey and highlights the original validation research studies that were conducted on four Content Enhancement Routines: the Concept Mastery Routine, the Concept Comparison Routine, the Concept Anchoring Routine, and the Question Exploration Routine. Each study utilizes some type of experimental research design to determine the effects of teachers’ use of the routine on the test performance of subgroups of secondary students within inclusive classes. The subgroups included students with disabilities and students without disabilities—high achievers, normal achievers, and low achievers. In all of the studies, the students who participated in the instructional routine earned significantly higher test scores than students who participated in a standard lecture/discussion lesson. Additionally, where significant differences were found, the performance of each subgroup of students that participated in the instructional routine was significantly higher than the performance of their paired subgroup that participated in the lecture/discussion lesson.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从研究到实践的35年:四种包容性学科领域课堂内容强化程序研究述评(一
本文是由两部分组成的文章的第一部分,重点介绍了一组研究人员35年的历程,他们在研究到实践的道路上探索了内容增强例程的发展,在包容性学科领域教学中使用的教学例程。第一部分讲述了这段旅程的前半部分,重点介绍了对四个内容增强例程进行的原始验证研究:概念掌握例程、概念比较例程、概念锚定例程和问题探索例程。每项研究都采用某种类型的实验研究设计来确定教师使用常规对包容性班级中学生分组考试成绩的影响。这些分组包括残疾学生和非残疾学生——高成就者、普通成就者和低成就者。在所有的研究中,参加常规教学的学生比参加标准讲座/讨论课的学生获得了明显更高的考试成绩。此外,在发现显著差异的地方,参加教学常规的每个学生小组的表现显著高于参加讲座/讨论课的配对小组的表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Issue Information (Aims and Scope, Subscription and copyright info, TOC and Editorial Board) Considering Social Validity in Special Education Research The Impact of Gender, Accommodations, and Disability on the Academic Performance of Canadian University Students with LD and/or ADHD Language Proficiency and the Relation to Word-Problem Performance in Emergent Bilingual Students with Mathematics Difficulties Universal and Specific Services for University Students with Specific Learning Disabilities: The Relation to Study Approach, Academic Achievement, and Satisfaction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1