Effectiveness of a Cognitive Strategy Intervention in Improving Arithmetic Computation Based on the PASS Theory

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine if an instruction designed to facilitate planning, given by teachers to their class as a group, would have differential effects depending on the specific Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, Successive (PASS) cognitive characteristics of each child. A cognitive strategy instruction that encouraged planning was provided to the group of 19 students with learning disabilities and mild mental impairments. All students completed math worksheets during 7 baseline and 14 intervention sessions. During the intervention phase, students engaged in self-reflection and verbalization of strategies about how the arithmetic computation worksheets should be completed. The sample was sorted into one experimental and four contrast groups after the experiment was completed. There were four groups with a cognitive weakness in each PASS scale from the Cognitive Assessment System and one group with no cognitive weakness. The results showed that children with a cognitive weakness in Planning improved considerably (large effect size of 1.4), in contrast to those with a cognitive weakness in Attention (small effect size of 0.3), Simultaneous weakness (a slight deterioration and effect size of -0.2), Successive weakness (medium effect size of 0.4), and no cognitive weakness (small effect size of .2). These data showed that children with a Planning weakness benefitted from the instruction designed to help them be more plaful. Those childrne who received the planning-based instruction who were not low inplanning did not show the same level of improvement.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ashman, A.F. , & Conway, R.N.F. (1993). Using cognitive methods in the classroom. New York: Routledge .

Ashman, A.F. , & Conway, R.N.F. (1997). An introduction to cognitive education: Theory and applications. London: Routledge

Busk, P.L. , & Serlin, R.C. (1992). Meta-analysis for single-case research. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single case research design and analysis: Applications in psychology and education (pp. 187-212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). San Diego : Academic Press.

Cormier, P. , Carlson, J.S. , & Das, J.P. (1990). Planning ability and cognitive performance: The compensatory effects of a dynamic assessment approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 2, 437-449.

Das, J.P. , Naglieri, J.A. , & Kirby, J.R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes. Need-ham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Geary, D.C. (1989). A model for representing gender differences in the pattern of cognitive abilities. American Psychologist , 44, 1155-1156.

Kar, B.C. , Dash, U.N. , Das, J.P. , & Carlson, J.S. (1992). Two experiments on the dynamic assessment of planning . Learning and Individual Differences, 5, 13-29.

Kirby, J.R. , & Williams, N.H. (1991). Learning problems: A cognitive approach. Toronto: Kagan and Woo .

10.

Lloyd, J.W. , Forness, S.R. , & Kavale, K.A. (1998). Some methods are more effective than others. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33, 195-200.

11.

Mastropieri, M.A. , & Scruggs, T.E. (1991). Teaching students ways to remember. Cambridge: Brookline Books.

12.

Montague, M. (1997). Cognitive strategy instruction in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 164-177.

13.

Naglieri, J.A. (1999). Essentials of CAS assessment. New York: Wiley.

14.

Naglieri, J.A. (in press). Can profile analysis of ability test scores work? An illustration using the PASS theory and CAS with an unselected cohort. School Psychology Quarterly.

15.

Naglieri, J.A. , & Ashman A.A. (1999). Making the connection between PASS and intervention . In J. A. Naglieri (Ed.), Essentials of CAS assessment (pp.151-181). New York: Wiley.

16.

Naglieri, J.A. , & Das, J.P. (1997a). Cognitive Assessment System interpretive handbook . Chicago: Riverside.

17.

Naglieri, J.A. , & Das, J.P. (1997b). Cognitive assessment system. Chicago: Riverside.

18.

Naglieri, J.A. , & Gottling, S.H. (1995). A cognitive education approach to math instruction for the learning disabled: An individual study . Psychological Reports, 76, 1343-1354.

19.

Naglieri, J.A. , & Gottling, S.H. (1997). Mathematics instruction and PASS cognitive processes: An intervention study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 513-520.

20.

Pressley, M.P. , & Woloshyn, V. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves children's academic performance (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

21.

Scheid, K. (1993). Helping students become strategic learners. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

22.

Snow, R.E. (1989). Aptitude-treatment interaction as a framework for research on individual differences in learning. In P. L. Ackerman , R. J. Sternberg , & R. Glasser (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research (pp.13-60). New York: Freeman.

23.

Van Luit, J.E.H. , & Naglieri, J.A. (1999). Effectiveness of the MASTER program for teaching special children multiplication and division. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 98-107.

24.

Weiner, R.K. , Sheridan, S.M. , & Jenson, W.R. (1998). The effects of conjoint behavioral consultation and a structured homework program on math completion and accuracy in junior high students. School Psychology Quarterly, 13, 281-309.