Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Students with disabilities often face significant challenges in developing mathematical problem-solving skills, which are critical for academic success. Traditional problem-solving interventions have primarily focused on skill acquisition, leading to issues with knowledge application in real-world contexts. Enhanced Anchored Instruction (EAI) offers a multimedia-based, hands-on approach to address these challenges by integrating explicit instruction, video anchoring, and authentic activities. This article describes essential components and how to implement EAI in diverse special education classrooms and illustrates how a fourth-grade teacher used the EAI approach to enhance her students’ problem-solving skills through culturally responsive instruction. By combining technology tools with real-world application, the EAI approach can bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application, fostering deeper understanding and engagement among students with disabilities in diverse special education classrooms.

Keywords

Enhanced Anchored Instruction (EAI)mathematical problem solving special education educational technology culturally responsive instruction explicit instruction video anchoring authentic activities

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aceves

T. C.

Kennedy

M. J.

(Eds.) . (2024, February). High-leverage practices for students with disabilities (2nd ed.). Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children and CEEDAR Center. https://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2024/03/High-Leverage-Practices-for-Students-with-Disabilties-updated.pdf.

Alim

H. S.

Paris

Wong

C. P.

(2020). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A critical framework for centering communities. In Nasir

N. S.

Lee

C. D.

Pea

McKinney de Royston

(Eds.), Handbook of the cultural foundations of learning (pp. 261–276). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774977-18

Artzi

Hsin

L. B.

Sanford

A. K.

Brown

J. E.

Guin

(2022). Meeting the language needs of emergent multilingual students at risk for learning disabilities through multitiered systems of support. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 37(3), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12288

Bottge

B. A.

(2001). Building ramps and hovercrafts – and improving math skills. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990103400102

Bottge

B. A.

Hasselbring

T. S.

(1993). A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, 59(6), 556–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299305900608

Bottge

B. A.

Gassaway

L. J.

Jones

Gravil

(2021). Effects of formative assessment strategies on the fractions computation skills of students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 42(5), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932520942954

Bottge

B. A.

Gassaway

Toland

M. D.

Butler

Cho

S. J.

(2014). Effects of blended instructional models on math performance. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914527240

Bottge

B. A.

Toland

Gassaway

Butler

Choo

Griffin

(2015). Impact of enhanced anchored instruction in inclusive math classrooms. Exceptional Children, 81(2), 158–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914551742

Brown

J. S.

Collins

Duguid

(1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032

10.

Choo

(2024). Enhanced Anchored Instruction: A radical way of teaching problem solving to students with learning disabilities. LD Forum, (December), 5–7. https://council-for-learning-disabilities.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/LDF_2024_Dec_v3.pdf

11.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt . (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X019006002

12.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt . (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52–70. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44427992

13.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt . (1996). Multimedia environments for enhancing learning in mathematics Vosniadou

Corte

E. D.

Glaser

Mandl

(Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

14.

Dimou

(2021). Systematic review of the effectiveness of intervention strategies for teaching mathematics to secondary school students. Open Access Library Journal, 8, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107392

15.

Gersten

Chard

Jayanthi

Baker

Morphy

Flojo

(2008). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities or difficulty learning mathematics: A synthesis of the intervention research: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

16.

Grigorenko

E. L.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

L. S.

Wagner

R. K.

Willcutt

E. G.

Fletcher

J. M.

(2020). Understanding, educating, and supporting children with specific learning disabilities: 50 years of science and practice. The American psychologist, 75(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000452

17.

Klingner

J. K.

Edwards

P. A.

(2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.6

18.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

19.

Lein

A. E.

Jitendra

A. K.

Harwell

M. R.

(2020). Effectiveness of mathematical word problem solving interventions for students with learning disabilities and/or mathematics difficulties: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(7), 1388–1408. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000453

20.

Mandle

Kopp

(2005). Situated learning: Theories and models. In Nentwig

Waddington

(Eds.), Making it relevant. Context based learning of science. Waxmann.

21.

McClean

Crowe

(2017). Making room for interactivity: Using the cloud-based audience response system Nearpod to enhance engagement in lectures. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 364(6), Article fnx052. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnx052

22.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics . (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

23.

Paris

(2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244

24.

Paris

Alim

H. S.

(2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77

25.

Pólya

(1945). How to solve it; a new aspect of math method. Princeton University Press.

26.

Sanford

A. K.

Pinkney

C. J.

Brown

J. E.

Elliott

C. G.

Rotert

E. N.

Sennott

S. C.

(2020). Culturally and linguistically responsive mathematics instruction for English learners in multitiered support systems: PLUSS enhancements. Learning Disability Quarterly, 43(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719836173

27.

Schnepel

Aunio

(2021). A systematic review of mathematics interventions for primary school students with intellectual disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 37(4), 663–678. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.1943268

28.

Svane

Willemsen

Bleses

Krøjgaard

Verner

Nielsen

(2023). A systematic literature review of math interventions across educational settings from early childhood education to high school. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1229849

Using Enhanced Anchored Instruction in Diverse Math Classrooms

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References