This article addresses issues associated with common pedagogical practices that impede affective development of adolescents with learning disabilities. It also outlines goals, principles, and techniques for “watering up” curriculum and instruction so that intrinsic motivation, internal locus of control, academic and social self-concept, self-esteem, a sense of competence and confidence, an “attack” attitude about challenging tasks, willingness to take risks, and sense of personal potency are fostered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brown, A. (1994). The advance of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.
2.
Bryan, T. (1991). Social problems and learning disabilities. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities. New York: Academic Press.
3.
Carlson, S. A. (1985). The ethical appropriateness of subject-matter tutoring for learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 310–314.
4.
Cohen, E. G. (1991, April). Classroom management and complex instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
5.
Cohen, E.G. (1994a). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classsroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
Cohen, E. G. (1994b). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
7.
Dev, P. C. (1997). Intrinsic motivation and academic achievement: What does their relationship imply for the classroom teacher?Remedial and Special Education. 18(1), 12–19.
8.
Ellis, E. S. (1986). The role of motivation and pedagogy on the generalization of cognitive strategy training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(2), 66–70.
9.
Ellis, E. S. (1989). A metacognitive intervention for increasing class participation. Learning Disabilities Focus, 5(1), 36–46.
10.
Ellis, E. S. (1993). Integrative strategy instruction: A potential model for teaching content-area subjects to learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 358–383.
11.
Ellis. E. S. (1997). Watering-up instruction for adolescents with mild disabilities: Part 1—The knowledge dimension. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 326–346.
12.
Ellis, E. S. (in press-a). The content enhancement series: The phenomena mapping routine. Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises.
13.
Ellis, E. S. (in press-b). Using project-based learning to water up the curriculum. Tuscaloosa, AL: Masterminds.
14.
Ellis, E. S., & Nesmith, P. (in press). Self-determination and advocacy strategies for adolescents and adults with mild disabilities. Tuscaloosa, AL: Masterminds.
15.
Gibbs, J. (1994). Tribes: A new way of learning together. Santa Rosa, CA: Center Source Publications.
16.
Glenn, H. S., & Nelson, J. (1987). Raising children for success: Blueprints and building blocks for developing capable people. Fair Oaks, CA: Sunrise Press.
17.
Goodrich, H. (1997). Understanding rubrics. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 14–17.
18.
Kagen, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning.
19.
Kline, F. M. (1989). The development and validation of feedback routines for use in special education settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence.
20.
Margolis, H., & Freund, L. (1991). Implementing cooperative learning with mildly handicapped students in regular classrooms. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 38, 117–133.
21.
Nesmith, P. (1996). PROACT: A self-advocacy strategy. Paper presented at the 18th International Conference on Learning Disabilities, Nashville, TN.
22.
Newman, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(1), 8–12.
23.
Nichols, J. G. (1979). Quality and equality intellectual development. The role of motivation in education. The American Psychologist, 34(11), 1071–1084.
24.
Poplin, M. (1988a). Holistic/constructivist principles of the teaching/learning process: Implications for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 401–416.
25.
Poplin, M. (1988b). The reductionalistic fallacy in learning disabilities: Replicating the past by reducing the present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 389–400.
26.
Schlichter, C. L. (1993). Talents unlimited: Implementing the multiple talents approach in mainstream and gifted programs. In C. L. Schlichter & W. R. Palmer (Eds.), Thinking smart: A primer of the talents unlimited model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
27.
Schrag, J. (1993). Organizational, structural, and curricular strategies to support the implementation of unified, coordinated, and inclusive schools. Reston, VA.
28.
Van Reusen, A. K., & Bos, C. S. (1990). I PLAN: Helping students communicate in planning conferences. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22(4), 30–32.
29.
Vernon, D. S., & Schumaker, J. B. (1994). Who benefits from social skills instruction in the mainstream classroom?Exceptionality Education Canada, 3(12), 9–38.
30.
Wiggins, G. (1997). Practicing what we preach in designing authentic assessments. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 18–25.
