This study examined the effects of a schema-based direct instruction strategy on the word-problem-solving performance of three third and fourth-grade students (2 girls, 1 boy) with learning disabilities. An adapted multiple-probe-across-students design was used. Results indicated that the intervention was successful in increasing the percentage of correct solutions to word problems for all 3 students. In addition, maintenance of word-problem solving was seen 2 to 3 weeks after the study. Student interviews indicated that the strategy was beneficial. Further research with different students and problem types (e.g., multistep) and an investigation of the long-term effects of the strategy and its use in novel settings appear warranted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bartel, N. R. (1990). Problems in mathematics achievement. In D. D. Hammill & N. R. Bartel (Eds.), Teaching students with learning and behavior problems (5th ed., pp. 289–343). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
2.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
3.
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research. New York: Longman.
4.
Brian, T., Bay, M., Lopez-Reyna, N., & Donahue, M. (1991). Characteristics of students with learning disabilities: A summary of the extant data base and its implications for educational programs. In J. W. Lloyd, N. Nirbhay, & A. C. Repp (Eds.), The Regular Education Initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 113–131). Sycamore, IL: Sycamore.
5.
Briars, D. J., & Larkin, J. H. (1984). An integrated model of skill in solving elementary word problems. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 245–296.
6.
Carnine, D. W. (1992). Introduction. In D. Carnine & E. J. Kameenui (Eds.), Higher order thinking: Designing curriculum for higher order thinking (pp. 1–22). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
7.
Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1984). The acquisition of addition and subtraction concepts in grades one through three. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15, 179–202.
8.
Cawley, J. F., & Parmar, R. S. (1992). Arithmetic programming for students with disabilities: An alternative. Remedial and Special Education, 13(3), 6–18.
9.
Derry, S. J., Hawkes, L. W., & Tsai, C. J. (1987). A theory for remediating problem-solving skills of older children and adults. Educational Psychologist, 22, 55–87.
10.
Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., & Peterson, P. L. (1989). Learning mathematics with understanding: Cognitively guided instruction. In J. E. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (pp. 195–221). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
11.
Gersten, R., Woodward, J., & Darch, C. (1986). Direct instruction: A research based approach to curriculum design and teaching. Exceptional Children, 53, 17–31.
12.
Goldman, S. (1989). Strategy instruction in mathematics. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 43–55.
13.
Harris, K. R., & Pressley, M. (1991). The nature of cognitive strategy instruction: Interactive strategy construction. Exceptional Children, 57, 392–404.
14.
Kintsch, W., & Greeno, J. G. (1985). Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. Psychological Review, 92, 109–129.
15.
Kouba, V. L., Brown, C. A., Carpenter, T. P., Lindquist, M. M., Silver, E. A., & Swafford, J. O. (1988). Results of the fourth NAEP assessment of mathematics: Number, operations, and word problems. Arithmetic Teacher, 35(8), 14–19.
16.
Marshall, S. (1990). The assessment of schema knowledge for arithmetic story problems: A cognitive science perspective. In G. Kulm (Ed.), Assessing higher order thinking in mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
17.
Marshall, S. (1991). Schemas in problem solving: An integrated model of learning, memory, and instruction (Tech. Rep. No. 91-02). San Diego, CA: Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.
18.
Marshall, S. P. (1992). Assessing schema knowledge. In N. Frederikson, R. J. Misslevy, & I.I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 155–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
Marshall, S. P. (1993). Assessing schema knowledge. In N. Frederikson, R. Mislevy, & I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 155–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20.
Marshall, S., Barthuli, K. E., Brewer, M. A., & Rose, F. E. (1989). STORY PROBLEM SOLVER: A schema-based system of instruction (CRMSE Tech. Rep. No. 89-01). San Diego, CA: Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.
21.
Marshall, S., Pribe, C. A., & Smith, J. D. (1987). Schema knowledge structures for representing and understanding arithmetic story problems (Tech. Rep. Contract No. N00014-85-K-0061). Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research.
22.
Mercer, C. D., & Miller, S. P. (1992). Teaching students with learning problems in math facts. Remedial and Special Education, 13(3), 19–35, 61.
23.
Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21(1 & 2), 139–161.
24.
Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children's problem-solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). New York: Academic Press.
25.
Rosenshine, B. (1986). Synthesis of research on explicit teaching. Educational Leadership, 43, 60–69.
26.
Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1984). Classroom instruction in reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 745–798). New York: Longman.
27.
Silbert, J., Carnine, D., & Stein, M. (1990). Direct instruction mathematics. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
