Recent research demonstrates the effectiveness of process instruction in academic domains for children and adolescents with learning disabilities. The articles in this series attest to the gains that have been made by using cognitive process-based instruction to teach for acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of knowledge essential to success in the classroom. However, many of these studies use individual instruction, and, while they are effective, they could not be described as efficient.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berger, R.S., & Reid, D.K. (1989). Differences that make a difference: Comparisons of metacomponential functioning and knowledge base among groups of high and low IQ learning disabled, mildly mentally retarded, and normally achieving adults. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 422–429.
2.
Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (1989). Components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 353–361.
3.
Hutchinson, N.L. (1989, April). The effects of small group instruction in algebra problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
4.
Hutchinson, N.L. (1990a). Applying cognitive strategy research to teach complex knowledge in the classroom: Challenges for researchers and practitioners. B.C. Journal of Special Education, 14, 201–216.
5.
Hutchinson, N.L. (1990b, June). Now I can do it! Now they can do it! Implementing strategy instruction in an inner city school. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Association for Educational Psychology, Victoria, BC.
6.
Hutchinson, N.L., & Wong, B.Y.L. (in press). Intervention research: A Canadian flavour. In B.Y.L. Wong (Ed.), Intervention research in learning disabilities: An international perspective.New York: Springer-Verlag.
7.
Levin, J.R. (1986). Four cognitive principles of learning-strategy instruction. Educational Psychologist, 21, 3–17.
8.
Louis, K.S., & Dentler, R.A. (1988). Knowledge use and school improvement. Curriculum Inquiry, 18, 33–62.
9.
Montague, M., & Bos, C. (1986). The effect of cognitive strategy training on verbal math problem solving performance of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 26–33.
10.
Olson, J. (1981). Teacher influence in the classroom: A context for understanding curriculum translation. Instructional Science, 10, 259–275.
11.
Olson, J. (1985). Changing our ideas about change. Canadian Journal of Education, 10, 294–308.
12.
Peterson, P., & Swing, S. (1983). Problems in classroom implementation of cognitive strategy instruction. In M. Pressley & J.R. Levin (Eds.), Cognitive strategy research: Educational implications (pp. 267–287). New York: Springer-Verlag.
13.
Pressley, M., Goodchild, F., Fleet, J., Zajchowski, R., & Evans, E.D. (1989). The challenges of classroom strategy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 89, 301–342.
14.
Slife, B.D., Weiss, J., & Bell, T. (1985). Separability of metacognition and cognition: Problem solving in learning disabled and regular students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 437–445.
15.
Sternberg, R.J. (1987). A unified theory of intellectual exceptionality. In J. Day & J.G. Borkowski (Eds.), Intelligence and exceptionality: New directions for theory, assessment, and instructional practices (pp. 135–172). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
