Computer Assisted Instructional Programs to Teach Mathematics to Students with Learning Disabilities: Analysis of the Instructional Design Features

Paul Riccomini*
*Associate Professor,EugeneT. Moore School of Education, Clemson University
Periodicity:December - February'2008
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.3.3.734

Abstract

This paper is an analysis of published research on computer-assisted instruction (CAI) for mathematics involving students with learning disabilities. A systematic search of the literature on computer-assisted instructional interventions for students with learning disabilities yielded 25 studies that met the criteria for inclusion in this analysis. The studies were analyzed on an identified set of evidenced-based instructional components validated in the effective teaching research. Overall, the results suggest that most of the identified evidenced-based instructional components are incorporated into CAI programs used to teach mathematics to students with learning disabilities. Additionally, the results indicate that CAI is a generally effective means for increasing the mathematical performance of students with learning disabilities. Although promising, the implications for practice based on this analysis are limited by the relatively small number of studies reviewed and the diverse array of mathematical concepts and skills targeted. Findings from this analysis highlight the need for continued development and research validation of CAI programs focusing on improving learning outcomes of students with learning disabilities.

Keywords

Learning Disabilities, Effective Teaching, Computer-assisted instruction.

How to Cite this Article?

Paul Riccomini (2008). Computer Assisted Instructional Programs to Teach Mathematics to Students with Learning Disabilities: Analysis of the Instructional Design Features. i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology. 3(3), 38-48. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.3.3.734

References

[1]. Bahr, C. M., & Reith, H. J. [1989]. The effects of instructional computer games and drill and practice software on learning disabled students‘ mathematics achievement. Computers in the schools, 6(3/4), 1987.
[2]. Bahr, C. M., & Reith, H. J. [1991]. Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goals on student achievement using computer-based driil-and- practice. Journal of special education technology, 11(1), 33-48.
[3]. Boltge, B. A. (1999). Effects of computerized math instruction on problem solving of average and below- average achieving students. The Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 81-92.
[4]. Bottge, B. A. & Hasselbring, T.S. [1993]. A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional children, 59(6), 556-566.
[5]. Bottge, B. A., Reuda, E., Larouque, R T., Serlin, R. C., & Kwon, j. (2007). Integrating reform—oriented math instruction in special education settings. Learning disabilities research &practice, 22(2), 96-] 09.
[6]. Bost, l., & Riccomini, F J. (2006). Effective instruction: an inconspicuous strategy for dropout prevention. Remedial and special education, 27(5), 301-311 .
[7]. Chiang, B. (1986). Initial learning and transfer effects of Microcomputer drills on LD students‘ multiplication skills. Learning disability quarterly, 9, 118-123.
[8]. Christensen, C. A., & Gerber, M. M. [1 990]. Effectiveness of computerized drill and practice games in teaching basic math facts. Exceptionality, 1, 149-165.
[9]. Friedman, S. G., & Hofmeister, A. M. (1984). Matching technology to content and learners: a case study. exceptional children, 5 4(2), 130-134.
[10]. Gersten, R. (1985). Direct instruction with special education students: a review of evaluation research. The Journal of special education, 4 9(1), 41 -58.
[11]. Gersten, R., Carnine, D., &woodward, J. (1987]. Direct Instruction research: the third decade. Remedial and Special education, 8(6), 48-56.
[12]. Gleason, M., Carnine, D., & Boriero, D. (1990). Improving CAI effectiveness with attention to instructional design in teaching story problems to mildly handicapped students. Journal of special education technology, 10(3), 129-136.
[13]. Hasselbring, T. S., Goin, L.I., & Bransford, J. D. (1988). Developing math automaticity in learning handicapped children: the role of computerized drill and practice. Focus on exceptional children, 20 (6), 1-7.
[14]. Hughes, C. A. & Maccini, P. (1997]. Computer-assisted mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A research review. Learning disabilities, 8(3), 1 55-166.
[15]. Jitendra A., & Xin, Y. R (1997). Mathematical word- Problem-solving instruction for students with mild disabilities And students at riskfor math failure: a research synthesis. The Journal ofspecial education, 20(4), 41 2-438.
[16]. Kelly, B., Carnine, D., Gersten, R. and Grossen. B. (1986). The effectiveness of videodisc instruction in teaching fractions to learning-disabled and remedial high school students. Journal of special education Technology, 8(2), 5-17.
[17]. Koscinski, S. T., & Gast, D. L. (1993). Computer- Assisted instruction with constant time delay to teach multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities. Learning disabilities research & practice, 8(3), 157-168.
[18]. Lieber. J., 8: Semmel. M. I. (1987). The relationship between group size and performance on a microcomputer problem solving task for learning handicapped and non handicapped students. Journal of educational computing research, 3(2), 171 -187.
[19]. Lin, A., podell, D. M., &tournaki-rein, N. (1994). CAI and the development of automaticity in mathematics skills in students with and without mild mental handicaps. Computer in the schools, 11(1), 43-60.
[20]. Maccini, R, & Gagnon, C. (2000). Best practices for teaching mathematics to secondary students with special needs. Focus on exceptional children, 32(5), 1- 22.
[21]. Maccini, R, & hughes, C. (1997) Mathematics interventions for adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning disabilities research and practice, 12(3), 168- 176.
[22]. Mastropieri, M. A., & scruggs, T. E. (1987). Effective instruction for special education. Austin, tx: pro-ed.
[23]. Mastropieri, M. A., scruggs, T. E., & shiah, R. (1997). Can computers teach problem-solving strategies to students with mild mental retardation? A case study. Remedial and special education, 18(3),
[24]. Mcdermott, P. A., & Watkins, M. (1983). Computerized vs. Conventional remedial instruction for Learning-disabled pupils. Journal of special education, 17(1), 81-88.
[25]. Mercer, C. D., & miller, S. R (1991). Strategic math Series: Multiplication facts 0-81. Lawerence, ks: edge Enterprises.
[26]. Mercer, S.C., & Miller, N.l. (1992). Teaching students With learning problems in math to acquire, understand. and apply basic math facts. Remedial and special Education, 13(3), 19-25.
[27]. Miller, S. C., & cooke, N. L. (1989). Mainstreaming Students with learning disabilities for videodisc math instruction. Teaching exceptional children, spr., 57-60.
[28]. Miller, S. C., & mercer, C. (1993). Using a graduated Word problem sequence to promote problem-solving Skills. Learning disabilities research and practice, 8(3), 169-174.
[29]. Moore, B. M. (1988). Achievement in basic math skills For low performing students: a study of teachers‘ affects and CAI. Journal of experimental education, 57(1), 38-44.
[30]. National center for educational statistics. (2005). National assessment of educational progress: the Nation's report card [report no. 23-st02). Washington, dc: Author.
[31]. Okolo, C. M. (1992a). The effects of computer- Based attribution retraining on the attributions. Persistence, and mathematics computation of students With learning disabilities. Journal of disabilities, 25, 327- 334.
[32]. Okolo, C. M. (1992b). The effect of computer- Assisted instruction format and initial attitude on the Arithmetic facts proficiency and continuing motivation of Students with learning disabilities. Exceptionality, 3, 195- 211.
[33]. Podell, D. M., tournaki-rein, N., & lin, a. (1992). Automatization of mathematics skills via computer- Assisted instruction among students with mild mental Handicaps. Education and training in mental Retardation, 27(3), 200-206.
[34]. Rosenshine, B., & stevens, R. (1986). Teaching Functions. In m.c. whittrock (editor), the handbook of Research and teaching (pp. 376-391). New york: Macmillan.
[36]. Shiah, R., Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & fulk, B. J. M. [1995]. The effects of computer-assisted instruction On the mathematical problem solving of students with Learning disabilities. Exceptionality 5(3), 1 31-160.
[37]. Trifiletti, J. J., frith, G. H., & Armstong, S. [1984]. Micro-computers versus resource rooms for ld students: a Preliminary investigation of the effects on math skills. Learningdisabilityeuarterly 7, 69-76.
[38]. Watkins, M. W, & webb, C. (1981). Computer Assisted instruction with learning disabled students. Educational computer magazine, 1(3), 24-27.
[39]. Wilson, R., Majsterek, D., & Simmons, D. [t 996]. The Effects of computer-assisted versus teacher—directed Instruction on the multiplication performance of Elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning disabilities, 29(4), 383-390.
[40]. Witzel, B.S. & Riccomini, R J., (2007). Optimizing Math curriculum to meet the learning needs of students. Preventing school failure, 52(1 ), 13-1 8.
[41]. Woodward, J., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., Gleason, M., Johnson, G., & Collins, m. [1986]. Applying Instructional design principles to CAI for mildly
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Online 15 15

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.