Secondary students with learning disabilities are at a disadvantage in science classes because they have difficulty reading and acquiring information from textbooks. One way to help those students is to adapt textbook passages to make them easier to comprehend. This article reports the findings of a study exploring the effectiveness of two types of textbook adaptations—graphics and study guides—compared to self-study. The results indicated that graphics helped secondary, life science students achieve significantly better scores on multiple-choice tests than either study guides or self-study. No significant differences were found between the scores for study guides and self-study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Armbruster, B.J., & Anderson, T.H. (1984). Producing considerate expository text: Or easy reading is damned hard writing (Reading Education Report No. 46). Urbana: Illinois University, Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 240510)
2.
Bergerud, D.B., & Lovitt, T.C. (1986). The effectiveness of study guides as textbook adaptations in ninth-grade basic science: A pilot study. Unpublished manuscript.
3.
Darch, C., & Carnine, D. (1986). Teaching content area material to learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 53, 240–246.
4.
Fensham, P.J. (1985). Science for all: A reflective essay. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17, 415–435.
5.
Heimler, C.H., Daniel, L., & Lockard, J.D. (1984). Focus on life science. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
6.
Horton, S.V., & Lovitt, T.C. (in preparation). Information organization for secondary students; Textbook content maps.
7.
Koran, M.L., & Koran, J. (1980). Interaction of learner characteristics with pictorial adjuncts in learning from science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 477–483.
8.
Lovitt, T.C. (1984). Adapting materials questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Washington, Experimental Education Unit, Seattle.
9.
Lovitt, T., Rudsit, J., Jenkins, J., Pious, C., & Benedetti, D. (1985). Two methods of adapting science materials for learning disabled and regular seventh graders. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 275–285.
10.
Lovitt, T.C., Stein, M., & Rudsit, J. (1985). The use of visual spatial displays to teach science facts to learning disabled middle school students. Unpublished manuscript. Experimental Education Unit, University of Washington, Seattle.
Meyer, B.J.F., & Freedle, R.O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 121–143.
13.
Moyer, J.C., Sowder, L., Threadgill-Sowder, J., & Moyer, M.B. (1984). Story problem formats: Drawn versus verbal versus telegraphic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15, 342–351.
14.
Scruggs, T.E., Mastropieri, M.A., Levin, J.R., & Gaffney, J.S. (1985). Facilitating the acquisition of science facts in learning disabled students. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 575–586.
15.
State of Washington. (1984). Rules and regulations for programs providing services to children with handicapping conditions. (Chapter 392-171. Washington Administrative Code). Olympia. WA: Author.
16.
Torgesen, J.K. (1985). Memory processes in reading disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 350–357.
17.
Torgesen, J.K., & Licht, B. (1983). The learning disabled child as an inactive learner: Retrospect and prospects. In J.D. McKinney & L. Feagans (Eds.), Topics in learning disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 3–32). Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
18.
Zigmond, N., Levin, E. & Laurie, T.E. (1985). Managing the mainstream: An analysis of teacher attitudes and student performance in mainstream high school programs. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 535–541.
