This article reports results from a study of the use of technology to support students with learning disabilities in the use of effective study strategies. Thirty secondary students were given laptop computers and taught a variety of computer-based study strategies designed to facilitate information recording, organization, and manipulation. Results suggest that students adopted this innovation at three levels: (a) Power Users (skilled, independent users, integrating the computer into their schoolwork); (b) Prompted Users (skilled computer users, but requiring prompting); and (c) Reluctant Users (having limited knowledge and working only under supervision). Intelligence and reading test scores were associated with adoption levels in a statistically significant way.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, A., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1991). Electronic outlining: A computer-based study strategy for handicapped students in regular classrooms. In J. Marr & G. Tindal (Eds.) Oregon conference monograph 1991 (pp. 86–92). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.
2.
Adams, V. (1992). Comparing paper based and electronic outlining as a study strategy for mainstreamed students with learning disabilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
3.
Anderson-Inman, L. (1991, April). Computer-based outlining programs: Tools for academic studying and educational change. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
4.
Anderson-Inman, L. (1992a). Computer-supported studying for students with reading and writing difficulties. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 8, 317–319.
5.
Anderson-Inman, L. (1992b). Electronic studying: Computer-based information organizers as tools for lifelong learning. In N. Estes & M. Thomas (Eds.), Education “sans frontiers”: Proceedings of the ninth annual International Conference on Technology and Education, (pp. 1104–1106). Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin.
6.
Anderson-Inman, L. (1995/1996). Computer-assisted outlining: Information organization made easy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 316–320.
7.
Anderson-Inman, L., Horney, M. A., Chen, D., & Lewin, L. (1994). Hypertext literacy: Observations from the Electro Text project. Language Arts, 71(4), 37–45.
8.
Anderson-Inman, L. & Knox-Quinn, C. (1996). Spell checking strategies for successful students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 500–503.
9.
Anderson-Inman, L., Redekopp, R., & Adams, V. (1992). Electronic studying: Using computer-based outlining programs as study tools. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 8, 337–358.
10.
Anderson-Inman, L., & Tenny, J. (1989). Electronic studying: Information organizers to help students study “better,” not “harder”–-Part 1. The Computing Teacher, 16(8), 33–36.
11.
Anderson-Inman, L., & Zeitz, L. (1994). Beyond notecards: Synthesizing information with electronic study tools. The Computing Teacher, 21(8), 21–25.
12.
Armbruster, B. B., Echols, C. H., & Brown, A. L. (1983). The role of metacognition in reading to learn: A developmental perspective (Reading Education Report No. 40). Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 228 617)
13.
Arms, V. M. (1984). A dyslexic can compose on a computer. In A. Lane (Ed.), Readings in microcomputers and special education (pp. 64–66). Guilford, CT: Special Learning Corporation.
14.
Aweiss, S. (1994-95). Situating learning in technology: The case of computer-mediated reading supports. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 23(1), 63–74.
15.
Bianco, L., & McCormick, S. (1989). Analysis of effects of a reading study skill program for high school learning-disabled students. Journal of Educational Research, 82(5), 282–288.
16.
Borkowski, J. G., Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1989). The challenges of teaching good information processing to learning disabled students. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 36(3), 169–185.
17.
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher, 10, 14–21.
18.
Dansereau, D. (1985). Learning strategy research. In J. Segal, S. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills (pp. 42–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
Deshler, D. D., & Lenz, B. K. (1989). The strategies instructional approach. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 36, 203–224.
20.
Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (1986). Learning strategies: An instructional alternative for low-achieving adolescents. Exceptional Children, 53, 583–590.
21.
Ekvall, E. E. (1986). Ekvall reading inventory (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
22.
Fais, L., & Wanderman, R. (1987). A computer-aided writing program for learning disabled adolescents.Litchfield, CT: Forman School.
23.
Graham, S., & MacArthur, C. A. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training. The Journal of Special Education, 22, 133–152.
24.
Haller, E. P., Child, D. A., & Walberg, H. J. (1988). Can comprehension be taught? A quantitative synthesis of “metacognitive” studies. Educational Researcher, 17(9), 5–8.
25.
Higgins, K., & Boone, R. (1990). Hypertext computer study guides and the social studies achievement of students with learning disabilities, remedial students, and regular education students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 529–540.
26.
Horney, M. A., & Anderson-Inman, L. (in press). Hypermedia for readers with hearing impairments: Promoting literacy with electronic text enhancements. In C. K. Kinzer, K. Hinchman, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Forty-third yearbook–-National reading conference.
27.
Horney, M., Zeitz, L., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1991). Electronic outlining promotes thinking and writing across the curriculum. The Writing Notebook, 1(2), 29–33.
28.
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., Givens, A., & Nelson, R. (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, 102–107.
Jacobi, C. (1986). Word processing for special needs students: Is there really a gain?Educational Technology, 26, 36–39.
31.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1985). Kaufman test of educational achievement.Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
32.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1987). Kaufman brief intelligence test.Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
33.
Kerchner, L. B., & Kistinger, B. J. (1984). Language processing/word processing: Written expression, computers and learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 329–335.
34.
Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computer environments as cognitive tools for enhancing learning. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 261–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35.
Lessen, E., Dudzinski, M., Karsh, K., & Van Acker, R. (1989). A survey of ten years of academic intervention research with learning disabled students: Implications for research and practice. Learning Disabilities Focus, 4(2), 106–122.
36.
Loranger, L. A. (1994). The study strategies of successful and unsuccessful high school students. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(4), 347–360.
37.
MacArthur, C. A., & Haynes, J. A. (1995). Student assistant for learning from text (SALT): A hypermedia reading aid. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(3), 150–159.
38.
MacArthur, C. A., Haynes, J. A., Malouf, D. B., Harris, K., & Owings, M. (1990). Computer assisted instruction with learning disabled students: Achievement, engagement, and other factors that influence achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 311–328.
39.
Malouf, D. B., Wizer, D. R., Pilato, V. H., & Grogan, M. M. (1990). Computer-assisted instruction with small groups of mildly handicapped students. Journal of Special Education, 24, 51–68.
40.
McCrady, W. (1982). Listening and the learning disabled student. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 261 440)
41.
McGuire, J. M., & O'Donnell, J. M. (1989). Helping learning disabled students to achieve: Collaboration between faculty and support services. College Teaching, 37(1), 29–32.
42.
Newcomer, P. L., & Bryant, B. R. (1993). Diagnostic achievement test for adolescents (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
43.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn.New York: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Oregon Department of Education. (1994, July). Oregon administrative rules: Chapter 581, Division 15-Department of Education. Salem, OR: Office of the Secretary of State.
45.
Outhred, L. (1989). Word processing: Its impact on children's writing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 262–264.
46.
Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167–182.
47.
Perkins, D. N. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information-processing technology shapes thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11–17.
48.
Reid, D. K. (1988). Teaching the learning disabled.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
49.
Reith, H. J., & Polsgrove, L. (1994). Curriculum and instructional issues in teaching secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9(2), 118–126.
50.
Reyes, E. I., Gallego, M. A., Duran, G. Z., & Scanlon, D. J. (1989). Integration of internal concepts and external factors: Extending the knowledge of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 9(1-2), 112–124.
51.
Salomon, G. (1993). On the nature of pedagogic computer tools: The case of the writing partner. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 179–196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
52.
Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20, 10–16.
53.
Saski, J., Swicegood, P., & Carter, J. (1983). Notetaking formats for learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 265–272.
54.
Schwartz, S. S., & MacArthur, C. A. (1990). Creating a community of writers: The Computers and Writing Instruction Project. Preventing School Failure, 34(4), 9–13.
55.
Seidenberg, P. L. (1985). A framework for curriculum development for secondary learning disabled students.Brooklyn, NY: Long Island University Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 274112)
56.
Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American high school.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
57.
Sullivan, P. (1991). Taking control of the page: Electronic writing and word publishing. In G. E. Hawisher & C. L. Selfe (Eds.), Evolving perspectives on computers and composition studies: Questions for the 1990s (pp. 43–64). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
58.
Tenny, J. L. (1988). A study of the effectiveness of computer mediated and rereading study procedures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
59.
Tenny, J. L. (1990). Inspiration: The thought processor. The Computing Teacher, 18(2), 46–49.
60.
Thomas, J. W., & Rohwer, W. D. Jr. (1986). Academic studying: The role of learning strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21(1&2), 19–41.
61.
Torgeson, J. K., & Licht, B. (1983). The disabled child as an inactive learner: Retrospect and prospects. In J. D. McKinney & L. Feagans (Eds.), Current topics in learning disabilities (Volume 1, pp. 3–31). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
62.
Wechsler, D. (1974). Wechsler intelligence scale for children.San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-Third edition.San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
65.
Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (1990). Learning and study strategies inventory-High school version.Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.
66.
Wise, W. B., & Olson, K. R. (1994). Computer speech and the remediation of reading and spelling problems. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12(3), 207–220.
67.
Woodcock, R. (1987). Woodcock reading mastery tests-Revised.Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
68.
Woodcock, R. W. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery-Revised.Allen, TX: DLM.
69.
Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1977). Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery/tests of cognitive ability.Allen, TX: DLM.
70.
Yankelovich, N., Meyrowitz, N., & Van Dam, A. (1985). Reading and writing the electronic book. Computer, 18, 15–30.
71.
Zeitz, L., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1992). The effects of computer-based formative concept mapping on learning high school science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
72.
Zigmond, N. (1990). Preview. Special Issue: Enhancing the education of difficult-to-teach students–-Federally sponsored research in the mainstream. Exceptional Children, 57, 100.
73.
Zigmond, N., Vallecorsa, A., & Leinhardt, G. (1980). Reading instruction for students with learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 1, 89–98.
