This article is intended to supplement a published research report (Gersten, Baker, Smith–Johnson, Dimino, & Peterson, in press) on an instructional intervention study by discussing some of the behind–the–scenes issues that typically do not appear in a published research report. In particular, I discuss how use of design experiments helped shape the intervention, the interaction between research questions and research design, and the role of intuition in designing and refining experimental studies of instruction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmbrusterB. B., AndersonT. H., & MeyerJ. L. (1991). Improving content area reading using instructional graphics. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 393–441.
2.
ArmbrusterB. B., AndersonT. H., & OstertagJ. (1987). Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text?Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 331–346.
3.
BeckI. L., McKeownM. G., SinatraG. M., & LoxtermanJ. A. (1991). Revising social studies text from a text–processing perspective: Evidence of improved comprehensibility. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 251–276.
4.
BradleyA. (1999, October 6). Science group finds middle school textbooks inadequate. Education Week, p. 5.
5.
BrownA. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178.
6.
BrunerJ. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
7.
CampioneJ., & BrownA. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment (pp. 82–116). New York : Guilford Press.
8.
CarnineD., CrawfordD. B., HarnissM. K., & HollenbeckK. L. (1995). Understanding U.S. history Volume 1—Through the Civil War. Eugene, OR : Considerate Publishing.
9.
CarnineD., SteelyD., & SilbertJ. (1996). Understanding U.S. History– Volume 2 — Reconstruction to world leadership. Eugene, OR : University of Oregon.
10.
CaroR. (2003). Master of the senate: The years of Lyndon Johnson. New York : Vintage.
11.
CBS News. (1960). Harvest of shame. Oceanside, CA : LA Media.
12.
DallekR. (1998). Flawed giant: Lyndon Johnson and his times 1961–1973. New York : Oxford University Press.
13.
De La PazS., & MacArthurC. (2003). Knowing the how and why of history: Expectations for secondary students with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 142–154.
14.
DeVinneyJ. A., (Writer) & DeVinneyJ. A. (Director). (1991). Eyes on the prize—America's Civil Rights years, 1954–1965. Boston : Blackside Inc.
15.
DeweyJ. (1916). Democracy and education. New York : Macmillan.
16.
ElbaumB., VaughnS., HughesM., & MoodyS. W. (1999). Grouping practice sand reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399–415.
17.
EnglertC. S., RaphaelT. E., AndersonL. M., AnthonyH. M., & StevensD. D. (1991). Making writing strategies and self–talk visible: Cognitive strategy instruction in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 337–372.
18.
FuchsD., FuchsL. S., & BurishP. (2000). Peer–assisted learning strategies: An evidence–based practice to promote reading achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 85–91.
19.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD., KazdanS. R., & AllenS. (1999). Effects of peer–assisted learning strategies in reading with and without training in elaborated help giving. Elementary School Journal, 99, 201–220.
20.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD., PhillipsN. B., HamlettC. L., & KarnsK. (1995). Acquisition and transfer effects of classwide peer–assisted learning strategies in mathematics for students with varying learning histories. School Psychology Review, 24, 604–620.
21.
GallM. D., WardB. A., BerlinerD. C., CahenL. S., WinneP. H., ElashoffJ. D., . (1978). Effects of questioning techniques and recitation on student learning. American Education Research Journal, 15, 175–199.
22.
GerstenR., & BakerS. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English–language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454–470.
23.
GerstenR., & BakerS. (2001). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities: A meta–analysis. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 251–272.
24.
GerstenR., BakerS., & LloydJ. W. (2000). Designing high quality research in special education: Group experimental design. Journal of Special Education, 34, 2–18.
25.
GerstenR., BakerS. K., PugachM., ScanlonD., & ChardD. (2001). Contemporary research on special education teaching. In RichardsonV. (Ed.), Handbook for research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 695–722). Washington, DC : American Educational Research Association.
26.
GerstenR., BakerS., Smith–JohnsonJ., DiminoJ., & PetersonA. (in press). Eyes on the prize: Teaching history to students with learning disabilities in inclusive settings. Exceptional Children.
27.
GerstenR., BakerS., Smith–JohnsonJ., FlojoJ., & Hagan–BurkeS. (2004). A tale of two decades: Trends in support for federally funded experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children70, 323–332.
28.
GerstenR., FuchsL. S., ComptonD., CoyneM. D., GreenwoodC., & InnocentiM. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi–experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149–164.
29.
GerstenR., FuchsD., WilliamsJ., & BakerS. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279–320.
30.
GerstenR., MorvantM., & BrengelmanS. (1995). Close to the classroom is close to the bone: Coaching as a means to translate research into classroom practice. Exceptional Children, 62, 52–66.
31.
GerstenR., & WoodwardJ. (1992). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: Strategies for assisting classroom teachers’ work with at risk students and students with disabilities. In CarnineD. & Kame'enuiE. (Eds.), Higher cognitive functioning for all students (pp. 201–218). Austin, TX : Pro–ED.
32.
HarnissM., HollenbeckK. L., CrawfordD. B., & CarnineD. (1994). Content organization and instructional design issues in the development of history texts. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 235–248.
33.
HiebertJ. (1999). Relationships between research and NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 3–19.
34.
KellyA. E., & LeshR. A. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
35.
KinderD., & BursuckW. (1993). History strategy instruction: Problem–solution–effect analysis, timeline, and vocabulary instruction. Exceptional Children, 59, 324–335.
36.
KinzerC. K., GabellaM. S., & RiethH. J. (1994). An argument for using multimedia and anchored instruction to facilitate mildly disabled students’ learning of literacy and social studies. Technology and Disability, 3, 117–128.
37.
LeinhardtG. (1994). History: A time to be mindful. In LeinhardtG., BeckI. L., & StaintonC. (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 206–255). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
38.
MacArthurC. A., FerrettiR. P., & OkoloC. M. (2002). On defending controversial viewpoints: Debates of sixth graders about the desirability of early 20th–century American immigration. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17, 160–172.
39.
MacArthurC. A., SchwartzS. S., & GrahamS. (1991). Effects of reciprocal peer revision strategy in special education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 201–210.
40.
McKeownM. G., & BeckI. L. (1994). Making sense of accounts of history: Why young students don't and how they might. In LeinhardtG., BeckI., & StaintonC. (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 1–26). Hillside, NJ : Erlbaum.
41.
McTigheJ., & LymanF. T.Jr. (1988). Cueing thinking in the classroom: The promise of theory–based tools. Educational Leadership, 45, 18–24.
42.
NewmanD. (1990). Opportunities for research on the organizational impact of school computers. Educational Researcher, 19(3), 8–13.
43.
PressleyM., & El–DinaryP. B. (1997). What we know about translating comprehension–strategies instruction research into practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 486–488.
44.
PressleyM., HarrisK. R., & MarksM. B. (1992). But good strategy instructors are constructivists!Educational Psychology Review, 4, 3–31.
45.
ReinkingD., & PickleJ. M. (1993). Using a formative experiment to study how computers affect reading and writing in classrooms. In KinzerC. Z. & LeuD. J. (Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice (pp. 263–270). Chicago : National Reading Conference.
46.
SeethalerP., & FuchsL. S. (2005). A drop in the bucket: Randomized controlled trials testing reading and math interventions. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 98–102.
47.
SwansonH. L., & DeshlerD. D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: Converting a meta–analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 124–135.
48.
VaughnS., MathesP., Linan–ThompsonS., CirinoP., CarlsonC., FrancisD., . (in press). First–grade English language learners at–risk for reading problems: Effectiveness of an English intervention. Elementary School Journal.
49.
WilsonS. (2001). Research on history teaching. In RichardsonV. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC : American Educational Research Association.
