Using Study Guides with Three Classifications of Secondary Students

Abstract

This research examined the effectiveness of using study guides with learning disabled, remedial, and regular education students enrolled in social studies and science classes at the secondary level. In two separate studies, the efficacy of two varieties of study guides was compared to a self-study condition, as methods to increase textbook comprehension. To increase the generalizability of research findings to actual classroom practices, no changes were made in the teachers, settings, textbooks, grouping arrangements, or the sequences of instruction that were normally used. Results indicated that study guides, whether teacher directed or student directed, produced significantly higher performace than self-study for the three classifications of students. Several practical issues involving the use of study guides with heterogeneous groups of secondary students are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson, R.C. , & Biddle, W.B. (1975). On asking people questions about what they are reading. In G. Bower (Ed.) , Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 89-132). New York: Academic Press.

Bergerud, D. , Lovitt, T.C. , & Horton, S.V. (1988). The effectiveness of textbook adaptations in life science for high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(2), 70–76.

Carnine, D. , & Kinder, D. (1985). Teaching low-performing students to apply generative and schema strategies to narrative and expository material. Remedial and Special Education, 6(1), 20–30.

Cheek, E.H. , & Cheek, M.C. (1983). Reading instruction through content teaching. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Coffman, J.E. , & Joyce, W.W. (1983). Latin America and Canada. Chicago: Follett.

Coleman, L.J. (1979, October). Using read-ability data for adapting curriculum materials. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 14, 163–169.

Deshler, D.D. (1978). Psychoeducational aspects of learning disabled adolescents. In L. Mann , L. Goodman , & J.L. Wiederholt (Eds.) , Teaching the learning-disabled adolescent (pp. 47-74) Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Deshler, D.D. , & Graham, S. (1981). Tape recording educational materials for secondary handicapped students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 12(2), 52–54.

Ebel, R. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

10.

Hamaker, C. (1986). The effects of adjunct questions on prose learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(2), 212–242.

11.

Herber, H.L. (1970). Teaching reading in content areas. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

12.

Horton, S.V., & Lovitt, T.C. (1987). [Effectiveness of teacher-prepared study guides with secondary learning disabled, remedial, and regular students in content-area classes]. Unpublished raw data.

13.

Horton, S.V. , Lovitt, T.C. , & Givens, A. (1988). A computer-based vocabulary program for three categories of students. The British Journal of Educational Technology, 19(2), 131–143.

14.

Horton, S.V. , Lovitt, T.C. , Givens, A. , & Nelson, R. (in press). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic deficits: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities.

15.

Lovitt, T.C. , & Horton, S.V. (1988). How to develop study guides. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 2, 213–221.

16.

Lovitt, T.C. , 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.

17.

Lovitt, T.C. , Rudsit, J. , Jenkins J. , Pious C. , & Benedetti, D. (1986). Adapting science materials for regular and learning disabled seventh graders. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 31–39.

18.

Magnoli, M.A. , Shymansky, J.A. , Blecha, M.K. , & Holly, J.C. (1983). Experiences in physical science. River Forest, IL: Laidlaw.

19.

Pelz, R. (1979). The Washington story: A history of our state. Seattle: Seattle Public Schools.

20.

Prescott, G.A. , Balow, I.H. , Hogan, T.P. , & Farr, R.C. (1984). The metropolitan achievement test. New York: Psychological Corp.

21.

Torgesen, J.K. (1985). Memory processes in reading disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 350–357.

22.

Zigmond, N. , Vallecorsa, A. , & Leinhardt, G. (1980). Reading instruction for students with learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 1, 89–98.