This meta-analysis synthesized over 40 years of research (k = 42 studies) in the social studies for students with learning disabilities. We analyzed the various mechanisms that researchers have used to improve outcomes in the social studies by conducting a subgroup investigation of interventions targeting the following instructional categories: (a) content acquisition, (b) general literacy in social studies, (c) alternative or digitized text, and (d) historical reasoning. The subgroup meta-analyses resulted in considerable variability across study and intervention components. Meta-analysis robust variance estimation procedures were used to aggregate standardized mean difference effect sizes of treatment and comparison groups. Implications for future research and suggestions for classroom instruction are provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
*AbrahamsenE. P.SheltonK. C. (1989). Reading comprehension in adolescents with learning disabilities: Semantic and syntactic effects. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 569–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948902200909
2.
*AndersP. L.BosC. S.FilipD. (1984). The effect of semantic feature analysis for learning-disabled students. National Reading Conference, 33, 162–166.
3.
AlexanderP. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32, 10–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032008010
4.
*BerkeleyS.MarshakL.MastropieriM.ScruggsT. (2011). Improving student comprehension of social studies text: A self-questioning strategy. Remedial and Special Education, 32(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510361261
5.
*BerkeleyS.RiccominiP. J. (2011). QRAC-the-code: A comprehension monitoring strategy for middle school social studies textbooks. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 154–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411409412
6.
*BerkeleyS.ScruggsT.MastropieriM. (2010). Reading comprehension instruction for students with learning disabilities, 1995–2006: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932509355988
7.
*BerkowitzS. J. (1986). Effects of instruction in text organization on sixth-grade students’ memory for expository reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(2), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/747843
8.
*BeyersS. J.LembkeE. S.CursB. (2013). Social studies progress monitoring and intervention for middle school students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(4), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.32469/10355/40126
9.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley.
10.
*BosC. S.AndersP. L. (1992). Using interactive learning strategies to promote text comprehension for students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development & Education, 39, 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/0156655920390305
11.
*BosC. S.AndersP. L.FilipD.JaffeL. E. (1989). The effects of an interactive instructional strategy for enhancing reading comprehension and content area learning for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(6), 384–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948902200611
12.
*BoykinA. (2015). The impact of computer-based graphic organizers with embedded self-regulated learning strategies on the content area argumentative writing of typical and struggling writers (UMI No. 3720658) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
13.
*BoyleE. A.RosenbergM. S.ConnellyV. J.WashburnS. G.BrinckerhoffL. C.BanerjeeM. (2003). Effects of audio texts on the acquisition of secondary-level content by students with mild disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(3), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593652
14.
*BrighamF. J.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1995). Elaborative maps for enhanced learning of historical information: Uniting spatial, verbal, and imaginal information. Journal of Special Education, 28, 440–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699502800404
15.
BulgrenJ. A.GranerP. S.DeshlerD. D. (2013). Literacy challenges and opportunities for students with learning disabilities in social studies and history. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12003
16.
*CashT. (2013). The effect of reciprocal mapping on high-risk sixth-grade students’ social studies achievement (UMI No. 3608693) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
17.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
De La PazS. (2005). Effects of historical reasoning instruction and writing strategy mastery in culturally and academically diverse middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.139
19.
De La PazS. (2012). Effective instruction for history and the social studies: What works for students with learning disabilities. In WongB.Y. L.ButlerD. L. (Eds.), Learning about learning disabilities (4th ed., pp. XX–XX). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-3884091.00012-6
20.
De La PazS. (2013). Teaching and learning in history: Reform-based practices for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 11, 89–105.
21.
*De La PazS.Monte-SanoC.FeltonM.CroningerR.JacksonC.PiantedosiK. W. (2017). A historical writing apprenticeship for adolescents: Integrating disciplinary learning with cognitive strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.147
22.
*De La PazS.WissingerD. R. (2016). Improving the historical knowledge and writing of students with or at risk for LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 5(6), 658–671. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219416659444
23.
*DiCeccoV. M.GleasonM. M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350040201
*FontanaJ. L.ScruggsT.MastropieriM. A. (2007). Mnemonic strategy instruction in inclusive classes. Remedial and Special Education, 28(6), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325070280060401
26.
GajriaM.JitendraA. K.SoodS.SacksG. (2007). Improving comprehension of expository text in students with LD: A research synthesis. Journal of learning disabilities, 40(3), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400030301
27.
*GerstenR.BakerS. K.Smith-JohnsonJ.DiminoJ.PetersonA. (2006). Eyes on the prize: Teaching complex historical content to middle school students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 264–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200301
28.
GerstenR.FuchsL. S.ComptonD.CoyneM.GreenwoodC.InnocentiM. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100202
29.
*HarnissM. K.CarosJ.GerstenR. (2007). Impact of the design of U.S. history textbooks on content acquisition and academic engagement of special education students: An experimental investigation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400020101
30.
HeafnerT. L.FitchettP. G. (2012). National trends in elementary instruction: Exploring the role of social studies curricula. Social Studies, 103(2), 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2011.592165
31.
HedbergE. C. (2011). GSUM: Stata module to calculate summary statistics for grouped data. Boston College Department of Economics.
32.
HedgesL. V.TiptonE.JohnsonM. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 39–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.17
33.
*HortonS. V.LovittT. C. (1989). Using study guides with three classifications of secondary students. The Journal of Special Education, 22(4), 447–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698902200406
34.
*HortonS. V.LovittT. C.GivensA.NelsonR. (1989). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic handicaps in a mainstreamed setting: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(2), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948902200205
35.
*HudsonP. (1997). Using teacher-guided practice to help students with learning disabilities acquire and retain social studies content. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511090
36.
*HudsonP. (1996). Using a learning set to increase the performance of students with learning disabilities in social studies. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11, 78–85.
37.
*KennedyM. J.DeshlerD. D.LloydJ. W. (2015). Effects of multimedia vocabulary instruction on adolescents with learn-ing disabilities. Journal of Learning Dis-abilities, 48(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413487406
38.
*KennedyM. J.ThomasC. N.MeyerJ. P.AlvesK. D.LloydJ. W. (2014). Using evidence-based multimedia to improve vocabulary performance of adolescents with LD. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(2), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948713507262
39.
KentS.WanzekJ.MartinezL. (2018). The application of empirically supported practices in middle school classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 39(6), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517744662
40.
*KentS.WanzekJ.SwansonE. A.VaughnS. (2015). Team-based learning for students with high-incidence disabilities in high school social studies classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12048
41.
*Lyons-WagnerE. (2010). The effects of a self-regulation learning-strategies instructional program on middle-school students’ use of learning strategies and study tools, self-efficacy, and history test performance (UMI No. 3442082) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
42.
MacArthurC. A.FerrettiR.OkoloC. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00042
43.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E. (1988). Increasing content area learning of learning disabled students: Research implementation. Learning Disabilities Research, 4, 17–25.
44.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E. (1989). Reconstructive elaborations: Strategies that facilitate content learning. Learning Disabil-ities Focus, 4(2), 73–77.
45.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.BakkenJ. P.BrighamF. J. (1992). A complex mnemonic strategy for teaching states and their capitals: Comparing forward and backward associations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 7, 96–103.
46.
*MastropieriM.ScruggsT.SpencerV.FontanaJ. (2003). Promoting success in high school world history: Peer tutoring versus guided notes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(1), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00057
47.
*MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E.WhedonC. (1997). Using mnemonic strategies to teach information about U.S. presidents: A classroom-based investigation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511089
48.
MojeE. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learningJournal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1598/jaal.52.2.1
National Council for the Social Studies. (2013). College, career, and civic life (C3) framework for social studies state standards.
51.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. http://www.corestandards.org
52.
National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853
53.
*NuttK. (2015). Mnemonic vocabulary instruction to enhance reading comprehension in the social studies (UMI No. 3707002) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
54.
*O’ConnorR. E.SanchezV.BeachK. D.BocianK. M. (2017). Special education teachers integrating reading with 8th grade U.S. history content. Learning Disabilities & Practice, 32(4), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12131
55.
*OkoloC. M.FerrettiR. P. (1996). Knowledge acquisition and technology-supported projects in the social studies for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264349601300204
56.
OkoloC. M.FerrettiR. (2014). History instruction for students with learning disabilities. In SwansonL.HarrisK.GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 462–486). New Guilford Press.
57.
*ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1989a). Mnemonic instruction of learning disabled students: A field-based evaluation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 119–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510727
58.
*ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1989b). Reconstructive elaborations: A model for content area learning. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 311–327. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163035
59.
ScruggsT.MastropieriM.BerkeleyS.GraetzJ. (2010). Do special education interventions improve learning of secondary content? A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 437–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327465
60.
*ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.MarshakL. (2012). Peer-mediated instruction in inclusive secondary social studies learning: Direct and indirect learning effects. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00346.x
StoelG.van DrieJ.van BoxtelC. (2015). Teaching historical expertise: Pedagogy for fostering causal reasoning in history. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47, 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.968212
63.
SwansonE.HairrellA.KentS.CiulloS.WanzekJ.VaughnS. (2014). A synthesis and meta-analysis of reading interventions using social studies content for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(2), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412451131
64.
*SwansonE.WanzekJ.VaughnS.FallA. M.RobertsG.HallC.MillerV. (2016). Middle school reading comprehension and content learning intervention for below-average readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 22, 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1072068
65.
*SwansonE.WanzekJ.VaughnS.RobertsG.FallA. (2015). Improving reading comprehension and social studies knowledge among middle school students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 81(4), 426–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914563704
66.
Tanner-SmithE. E.TiptonE. (2014). Robust variance estimation with dependent effect sizes: Practical considerations including a software tutorial in Stata and SPSS. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(1), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1091
67.
Tanner-SmithE.TiptonE.PolaninJ. (2016). Handling complex meta-analytic data structures using robust variance estimates: A tutorial in R. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 42(2), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-016-0026-5
68.
TiptonE. (2015). Small sample adjustments for robust variance estimation with meta-regression. Psychological Methods, 20(3), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000011
69.
TukeyJ. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley.
70.
*TwymanT.TindalG. (2006). Using a computer-adapted, conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340602100201
71.
VanSledrightB. (2002). In search of America’s past: Learning to read history in elementary school. Teachers College Press.
*WilkinsS. A. (2007). Teaching expository text strategies to improve reading comprehension in low readers. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 68(6-A), 2409.
*WinchesterK.DarchC.EavesR. C.ShippenM. E.ErnG.BellB. (2009). An evaluation of two methods for teaching United States history to students with learning disabilities. Journal of Direct Instruction, 9(1), 57–73.
76.
WineburgS. (1991). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.83.1.73
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
