Pub Date : 2019-08-26DOI: 10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9901
Richard T. Boon, K. Urton, Matthias Grünke, Thomas A. Rux
This narrative review provides an overview of the research literature on the effectiveness of mnemonics in mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities in a K-12 classroom. Eleven studies were identified in refereed journal articles and doctoral dissertations from 1975 to December 2018 that met the inclusion criteria. Overall findings of the studies on mnemonic strategies were positive to improve students’ performance in mathematics instruction. Discussion of the findings and future research directions, limitations, and final thoughts on the importance of further study of mnemonics in mathematics instruction are presented. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Mnemonic Strategies in Mathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Narrative Review","authors":"Richard T. Boon, K. Urton, Matthias Grünke, Thomas A. Rux","doi":"10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9901","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9901","url":null,"abstract":"This narrative review provides an overview of the research literature on the effectiveness of mnemonics in mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities in a K-12 classroom. Eleven studies were identified in refereed journal articles and doctoral dissertations from 1975 to December 2018 that met the inclusion criteria. Overall findings of the studies on mnemonic strategies were positive to improve students’ performance in mathematics instruction. Discussion of the findings and future research directions, limitations, and final thoughts on the importance of further study of mnemonics in mathematics instruction are presented. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87708909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-08-26DOI: 10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9835
S. R. Powell, E. Stevens, Katherine A. Berry
Word problems require students to read a language-based problem, identify necessary information to answer a prompt, and perform calculation(s) to develop a problem solution. Solving word problems proves particularly challenging for students with mathematics difficulties because skill in reading, interpretation of language, and mathematics are required for word-problem proficiency. We examined whether two versions of a word-problem intervention increased students’ understanding of three word-problem language features: naming a superordinate category, identifying irrelevant information, and providing a word-problem label. At pre- and posttest, 145 3rd-grade students solved word problems and answered questions about word-problem language. Students who participated in the word-problem interventions demonstrated improvement on identifying irrelevant information and providing word-problem labels over students in the business-as-usual condition. We did not identify group differences related to naming a superordinate category. These results suggest the importance of explicit teaching of language comprehension features within word-problem intervention. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Effects of a Word-Problem Intervention on Word-Problem Language Features for Third-Grade Students with Mathematics Difficulty","authors":"S. R. Powell, E. Stevens, Katherine A. Berry","doi":"10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9835","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/ldmj-2019-v24-i2-9835","url":null,"abstract":"Word problems require students to read a language-based problem, identify necessary information to answer a prompt, and perform calculation(s) to develop a problem solution. Solving word problems proves particularly challenging for students with mathematics difficulties because skill in reading, interpretation of language, and mathematics are required for word-problem proficiency. We examined whether two versions of a word-problem intervention increased students’ understanding of three word-problem language features: naming a superordinate category, identifying irrelevant information, and providing a word-problem label. At pre- and posttest, 145 3rd-grade students solved word problems and answered questions about word-problem language. Students who participated in the word-problem interventions demonstrated improvement on identifying irrelevant information and providing word-problem labels over students in the business-as-usual condition. We did not identify group differences related to naming a superordinate category. These results suggest the importance of explicit teaching of language comprehension features within word-problem intervention. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86069305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I2-8765
Rachel Lambert, Mina Chun, Jessie Davis, K. Ceja, Katie Aguilar, P. Moran, Lindsey Manset
Educational research undervalues the experiences of people with disabilities, including those with learning disabilities and/or dyslexia, whom we call insiders . In this study, we examined narratives pertaining to schooling from published memoirs and/or interviews with 30 insiders with learning disabilities or dyslexia. First, we describe how these insiders define learning disabilities. We found multiple definitions of learning disabilities (LD), from sharp divisions between “LDness” and “normal,” to conceptions of universal learner variability such as “everyone learns differently.” We also describe how insiders defined their gifts as learners, and the challenges they faced in schools. Insiders identified strengths around creative problem-solving, multimodal thinking, and persistence. Challenges in school involved learning how to read, difficulty memorizing disconnected facts and needing more time. Recommendations include designing instruction that builds on the cognitive gifts of those with learning disabilities and dyslexia while minimizing instruction that focuses on their challenges. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"“My Dyslexia is Like a Bubble”: How Insiders with Learning Disabilities Describe Their Differences, Strengths, and Challenges","authors":"Rachel Lambert, Mina Chun, Jessie Davis, K. Ceja, Katie Aguilar, P. Moran, Lindsey Manset","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I2-8765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I2-8765","url":null,"abstract":"Educational research undervalues the experiences of people with disabilities, including those with learning disabilities and/or dyslexia, whom we call insiders . In this study, we examined narratives pertaining to schooling from published memoirs and/or interviews with 30 insiders with learning disabilities or dyslexia. First, we describe how these insiders define learning disabilities. We found multiple definitions of learning disabilities (LD), from sharp divisions between “LDness” and “normal,” to conceptions of universal learner variability such as “everyone learns differently.” We also describe how insiders defined their gifts as learners, and the challenges they faced in schools. Insiders identified strengths around creative problem-solving, multimodal thinking, and persistence. Challenges in school involved learning how to read, difficulty memorizing disconnected facts and needing more time. Recommendations include designing instruction that builds on the cognitive gifts of those with learning disabilities and dyslexia while minimizing instruction that focuses on their challenges. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80545475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9146
Jane F. Gaultney, H. Peach, Manju Banerjee
Both ADHD and poor sleep are associated with deficits in prefrontal cortex functioning, and related executive processes (e.g. directing attention, judgement and decision-making). The present study examined whether sleep factors provided an indirect link between certain symptoms of ADHD and impulsivity or future orientation among college students. Several aspects of impulsivity were considered, including motor impulsivity, non-planning, and attentional impulsivity. Symptoms of ADHD and attentional impulsivity showed a significant indirect effect via risk for sleep disorder and sleep quality, but not through daytime sleepiness, sleep duration, or sleep consistency. Motor impulsivity was indirectly predicted through sleep quality only, and non-planning impulsivity produced no significant indirect effects. Future orientation was indirectly predicted by risk for sleep disorder and daytime sleepiness. One implication of these data is that this population should be screened for sleep issues and referred for treatment as needed. The present data do not indicate whether improving sleep (e.g., diagnosing and treating a sleep disorder, addressing counterproductive sleep hygiene practices) would improve impulsivity or lack of future orientation associated with ADHD, but rather reinforces the need to consider sleep issues when identifying or treating individuals with such disabilities. Implications for postsecondary disability services providers is discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Sleep Factors May Contribute Indirectly to Association between Symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Impulsivity and Future Orientation Among College Students","authors":"Jane F. Gaultney, H. Peach, Manju Banerjee","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9146","url":null,"abstract":"Both ADHD and poor sleep are associated with deficits in prefrontal cortex functioning, and related executive processes (e.g. directing attention, judgement and decision-making). The present study examined whether sleep factors provided an indirect link between certain symptoms of ADHD and impulsivity or future orientation among college students. Several aspects of impulsivity were considered, including motor impulsivity, non-planning, and attentional impulsivity. Symptoms of ADHD and attentional impulsivity showed a significant indirect effect via risk for sleep disorder and sleep quality, but not through daytime sleepiness, sleep duration, or sleep consistency. Motor impulsivity was indirectly predicted through sleep quality only, and non-planning impulsivity produced no significant indirect effects. Future orientation was indirectly predicted by risk for sleep disorder and daytime sleepiness. One implication of these data is that this population should be screened for sleep issues and referred for treatment as needed. The present data do not indicate whether improving sleep (e.g., diagnosing and treating a sleep disorder, addressing counterproductive sleep hygiene practices) would improve impulsivity or lack of future orientation associated with ADHD, but rather reinforces the need to consider sleep issues when identifying or treating individuals with such disabilities. Implications for postsecondary disability services providers is discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91155408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9021
Lisa B. Carey, C. Stephan, A. Pritchard
Existing research suggests that students with ADHD may not receive the expected benefit from some testing accommodations. One possible explanation for this lack of benefit might be that students do not receive adequate instruction in and practice with testing accommodations to make them effective. The current study was designed to investigate teacher belief, knowledge, and practices that may influence the competent use of academic testing accommodations on the part of students. An anonymous survey of current classroom teachers ( n = 240) representing the full range of roles and grade spans was conducted via social media platforms. Overall, teachers endorsed beliefs about testing accommodations most positively, followed by practice, then knowledge. Teacher role (i.e., special vs. general education teacher) and grade span taught were associated with beliefs, knowledge, and practice with regard to supporting competent student use of academic testing accommodations. Teacher training was positively associated with teacher knowledge regarding practices that are thought to best prepare students to use their testing accommodations with independence. These findings suggest that additional training may be needed, particularly for certain groups of teachers, in order to promote instructional practices that may improve the successful use of student academic testing accommodations. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Preparing Students for Competent Use of Academic Testing Accommodations: Teachers’ Belief, Knowledge, and Practice","authors":"Lisa B. Carey, C. Stephan, A. Pritchard","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9021","url":null,"abstract":"Existing research suggests that students with ADHD may not receive the expected benefit from some testing accommodations. One possible explanation for this lack of benefit might be that students do not receive adequate instruction in and practice with testing accommodations to make them effective. The current study was designed to investigate teacher belief, knowledge, and practices that may influence the competent use of academic testing accommodations on the part of students. An anonymous survey of current classroom teachers ( n = 240) representing the full range of roles and grade spans was conducted via social media platforms. Overall, teachers endorsed beliefs about testing accommodations most positively, followed by practice, then knowledge. Teacher role (i.e., special vs. general education teacher) and grade span taught were associated with beliefs, knowledge, and practice with regard to supporting competent student use of academic testing accommodations. Teacher training was positively associated with teacher knowledge regarding practices that are thought to best prepare students to use their testing accommodations with independence. These findings suggest that additional training may be needed, particularly for certain groups of teachers, in order to promote instructional practices that may improve the successful use of student academic testing accommodations. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74725322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-8849
Elizabeth D. Tuckwiller, William Dardick, Elisabeth L. Kutscher
The purpose of this mixed methodology study was to empirically investigate how adolescents with learning disabilities/ differences report and experience self-determination, grit, mindset, and optimism. Using items from established scales, we gathered survey data ( n =27) as well as interview data ( n =23), and examined the ability of mindset, grit, and optimism to predict self-determination, as well as evidence of construct overlap in the thoughts and reflections of adolescents with learning disabilities/differences. The results of the regression indicated that a significant portion of the variance of self-determination, approximately 65%, was explained by the predictors ( R 2 = 0.65, F (4, 22)=10.01, p <.001). Analysis of data from interviews, during which students were asked to reflect on their experiences of mindset and optimism, suggested that adolescents with learning disabilities/differences are engaging in the self-determination process in their daily lives in ways that deeply incorporate mindset and optimism orientations. Although we did not specifically interview students about self-determination, their reported thoughts and experiences about mindset and optimism included the three components and six steps outlined by the self-determined learning theory, providing additional evidence of the overlap of mindset, grit and optimism with the self-determination construct. Results are discussed in regard to future research and intervention development. Subscribe to LDMJ
本混合方法研究的目的是实证调查有学习障碍/差异的青少年如何报告和体验自我决定、勇气、心态和乐观。利用已建立的量表中的项目，我们收集了调查数据(n =27)和访谈数据(n =23)，并检验了心态、勇气和乐观对自我决定的预测能力，以及在学习障碍/差异青少年的思想和反思中存在结构重叠的证据。回归结果表明，自我决定方差的很大一部分(约65%)可以由预测因子解释(r2 = 0.65, F (4,22)=10.01, p <.001)。通过对学生心态和乐观经历的访谈数据分析，发现有学习障碍/学习差异的青少年在日常生活中参与自我决定过程的方式与心态和乐观倾向深度融合。虽然我们没有具体采访学生的自我决定，但他们报告的关于心态和乐观的想法和经历包括了自主学习理论概述的三个组成部分和六个步骤，为心态、勇气和乐观与自我决定结构的重叠提供了额外的证据。对今后的研究和干预措施进行了讨论。订阅LDMJ
{"title":"A Mixed-Methods Investigation of Mindset, Grit, Optimism, and Self-Determination in Adolescents with Learning Disabilities and Differences","authors":"Elizabeth D. Tuckwiller, William Dardick, Elisabeth L. Kutscher","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-8849","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-8849","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this mixed methodology study was to empirically investigate how adolescents with learning disabilities/ differences report and experience self-determination, grit, mindset, and optimism. Using items from established scales, we gathered survey data ( n =27) as well as interview data ( n =23), and examined the ability of mindset, grit, and optimism to predict self-determination, as well as evidence of construct overlap in the thoughts and reflections of adolescents with learning disabilities/differences. The results of the regression indicated that a significant portion of the variance of self-determination, approximately 65%, was explained by the predictors ( R 2 = 0.65, F (4, 22)=10.01, p <.001). Analysis of data from interviews, during which students were asked to reflect on their experiences of mindset and optimism, suggested that adolescents with learning disabilities/differences are engaging in the self-determination process in their daily lives in ways that deeply incorporate mindset and optimism orientations. Although we did not specifically interview students about self-determination, their reported thoughts and experiences about mindset and optimism included the three components and six steps outlined by the self-determined learning theory, providing additional evidence of the overlap of mindset, grit and optimism with the self-determination construct. Results are discussed in regard to future research and intervention development. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"248 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75321467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9355
Taylor A Koriakin, M. McCurdy, A. Pritchard, T. A. Zabel, L. Jacobson
The present study examined clinical utility of teacher ratings on the Colorado Learning Difficulties Questionnaire (CLDQ) learning difficulties screening within a referred, school-aged sample ( N =519, 5-18 years). Of this sample, 419 youth had CLDQ reading scale scores from a reading or general education teacher, and 338 had CLDQ math scale ratings from a math or general education teacher. Sensitivity, specificity and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were examined for specific reading and math difficulties (achievement SS<85). Cut-scores were identified to maximize sensitivity (reading: 60–91%; math: 85–89%), but specificity was low (reading: 60–64%, math: 47–48%); AUCs ranged from .70-.87 for reading and .75-.77 for math. Discrimination was comparable in an elementary subsample. Conditional probabilities suggested CLDQ ratings more accurately predicted children without learning difficulties (i.e., true negatives) than with learning difficulties. Parent and teacher ratings were well correlated ( r =.71), but addition of teacher ratings improved classification accuracy and model fit ( p <.001) across domains. Furthermore, CLDQ teacher ratings were helpful in reducing false positives based upon parent ratings alone. Findings suggest teacher ratings via CLDQ can be used to screen children at risk for learning difficulties, with teacher ratings showing added value over and above parent ratings. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Screening for Learning Difficulty Using Teacher Ratings on the Colorado Learning Difficulties Questionnaire","authors":"Taylor A Koriakin, M. McCurdy, A. Pritchard, T. A. Zabel, L. Jacobson","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9355","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2019-V24-I1-9355","url":null,"abstract":"The present study examined clinical utility of teacher ratings on the Colorado Learning Difficulties Questionnaire (CLDQ) learning difficulties screening within a referred, school-aged sample ( N =519, 5-18 years). Of this sample, 419 youth had CLDQ reading scale scores from a reading or general education teacher, and 338 had CLDQ math scale ratings from a math or general education teacher. Sensitivity, specificity and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were examined for specific reading and math difficulties (achievement SS<85). Cut-scores were identified to maximize sensitivity (reading: 60–91%; math: 85–89%), but specificity was low (reading: 60–64%, math: 47–48%); AUCs ranged from .70-.87 for reading and .75-.77 for math. Discrimination was comparable in an elementary subsample. Conditional probabilities suggested CLDQ ratings more accurately predicted children without learning difficulties (i.e., true negatives) than with learning difficulties. Parent and teacher ratings were well correlated ( r =.71), but addition of teacher ratings improved classification accuracy and model fit ( p <.001) across domains. Furthermore, CLDQ teacher ratings were helpful in reducing false positives based upon parent ratings alone. Findings suggest teacher ratings via CLDQ can be used to screen children at risk for learning difficulties, with teacher ratings showing added value over and above parent ratings. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76219240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-15DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-8990
A. Rouse, Ashley Sandoval
In this review, we synthesized the most recent decade of published research examining writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Using electronic searches, we identified experimental, quasi-experimental, and single-subject design studies published in peer-reviewed journals from 2008-2017 that included K-12 students with documented learning disabilities. Eligible studies included at least one writing intervention and researchers assessed that intervention’s impact using at least one writing quality measure. Across the 25 studies that met our review criteria, we summarized general study characteristics as well as information regarding study participants, research designs, writing interventions, and dependent measures of writing quality. We found a majority of studies were published in the first five years of the review span (2008-2012) across 12 different peer-reviewed journals. Study participants were primarily (n = 16 studies) in the secondary grades (i.e., 6 to 12). Most research designs (n = 19) were single-subject and nearly half of all studies (n = 12) involved writing strategy interventions. In most of the studies reviewed (n = 17), researchers created measures to assess writing quality outcomes. Implications for teaching writing to K-12 students with learning disabilities as well as directions for future research in this area are discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Writing Interventions for Students With Learning Disabilities: Characteristics of Recent Research","authors":"A. Rouse, Ashley Sandoval","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-8990","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-8990","url":null,"abstract":"In this review, we synthesized the most recent decade of published research examining writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Using electronic searches, we identified experimental, quasi-experimental, and single-subject design studies published in peer-reviewed journals from 2008-2017 that included K-12 students with documented learning disabilities. Eligible studies included at least one writing intervention and researchers assessed that intervention’s impact using at least one writing quality measure. Across the 25 studies that met our review criteria, we summarized general study characteristics as well as information regarding study participants, research designs, writing interventions, and dependent measures of writing quality. We found a majority of studies were published in the first five years of the review span (2008-2012) across 12 different peer-reviewed journals. Study participants were primarily (n = 16 studies) in the secondary grades (i.e., 6 to 12). Most research designs (n = 19) were single-subject and nearly half of all studies (n = 12) involved writing strategy interventions. In most of the studies reviewed (n = 17), researchers created measures to assess writing quality outcomes. Implications for teaching writing to K-12 students with learning disabilities as well as directions for future research in this area are discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2018-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87604772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-15DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9048
Michael A. Hebert, J. Bohatý, J. R. Nelson, Julia V. Roehling, K. Christensen
Students with writing difficulties may have difficulty when writing informational text with source material due to a) inexperience with such text and b) difficulties reading and understanding source material. Teaching students to take notes related to informational text using text structures (e.g., description, compare/contrast) may help them access source text and improve planning and organization of their ideas. Two pilot studies examining the usability, feasibility, and promise of a note-taking and text structure intervention are presented in this manuscript. In study 1, the researchers employed a multiple-probe design across three 4th grade participants with reading difficulties. In study 2, the researchers employed an underpowered experimental design, comparing the intervention to a narrative-based reading and writing strategies. Fidelity of implementation was acceptable to high in both studies, indicating preservice teachers find it useable and it is feasible to implement the lessons within the 30-minute time frame. However, there were mixed results of the intervention on note-taking outcomes. In study 1, a functional relation was demonstrated for two of three participants for the note-taking measure. In study 2, the intervention group did not statistically outperform the control group on the note-taking measure, but there was a non-significant effect size of 0.75 between the groups. The findings, though mixed, warrant further study of the intervention in a fully powered study. Results on reading outcomes for both studies are also discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"Taking Notes on Informational Source Text Using Text Structures: An Intervention for Fourth Grade Students with Learning Difficulties","authors":"Michael A. Hebert, J. Bohatý, J. R. Nelson, Julia V. Roehling, K. Christensen","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9048","url":null,"abstract":"Students with writing difficulties may have difficulty when writing informational text with source material due to a) inexperience with such text and b) difficulties reading and understanding source material. Teaching students to take notes related to informational text using text structures (e.g., description, compare/contrast) may help them access source text and improve planning and organization of their ideas. Two pilot studies examining the usability, feasibility, and promise of a note-taking and text structure intervention are presented in this manuscript. In study 1, the researchers employed a multiple-probe design across three 4th grade participants with reading difficulties. In study 2, the researchers employed an underpowered experimental design, comparing the intervention to a narrative-based reading and writing strategies. Fidelity of implementation was acceptable to high in both studies, indicating preservice teachers find it useable and it is feasible to implement the lessons within the 30-minute time frame. However, there were mixed results of the intervention on note-taking outcomes. In study 1, a functional relation was demonstrated for two of three participants for the note-taking measure. In study 2, the intervention group did not statistically outperform the control group on the note-taking measure, but there was a non-significant effect size of 0.75 between the groups. The findings, though mixed, warrant further study of the intervention in a fully powered study. Results on reading outcomes for both studies are also discussed. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"34-55"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2018-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87025674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-08-15DOI: 10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9042
Richard T. Boon, P. Barbetta, M. Paal
In this paper, we provide a research synthesis of single-case studies on the efficacy of graphic organizers to improve the writing composition outcomes of students with learning disabilities in grades K-12. A series of electronic searches, a hand search, and an ancestral search were conducted to locate relevant articles from 1975 to July 2017. Ten studies, including nine peer-reviewed articles and one doctoral dissertation, were retrieved that met our established criteria for inclusion. Findings indicated that graphic organizers were predominantly effective in improving the narrative and expository essay writing skills of students with learning disabilities. A discussion of the studies along with limitations and suggestions for future graphic organizer intervention research are presented. Subscribe to LDMJ
{"title":"The Efficacy of Graphic Organizers on the Writing Outcomes of Students with Learning Disabilities: A Research Synthesis of Single-Case Studies","authors":"Richard T. Boon, P. Barbetta, M. Paal","doi":"10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2018-V23-I2-9042","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we provide a research synthesis of single-case studies on the efficacy of graphic organizers to improve the writing composition outcomes of students with learning disabilities in grades K-12. A series of electronic searches, a hand search, and an ancestral search were conducted to locate relevant articles from 1975 to July 2017. Ten studies, including nine peer-reviewed articles and one doctoral dissertation, were retrieved that met our established criteria for inclusion. Findings indicated that graphic organizers were predominantly effective in improving the narrative and expository essay writing skills of students with learning disabilities. A discussion of the studies along with limitations and suggestions for future graphic organizer intervention research are presented. Subscribe to LDMJ","PeriodicalId":42442,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disabilities-A Multidisciplinary Journal","volume":"26 1","pages":"18-33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2018-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89606876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：