The purpose of this paper is to discuss selected relationships among metacognition, quantitative problem solving, and learning disabilities. Three types of problems are presented: word problems, knowledge-based problems, and decision or argument type problems. Metacognition is interpreted to mean a cognitive awareness of one's processes and the procedures to monitor those processes for problem solving. The paper contains numerous illustrations of problem types and describes techniques for teaching problem solving and for integrating metacognitive principles into the Instructional plan.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgardJ.A. (1974). Mainstreaming in Texas: A descriptive analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Mental Deficiency, Toronto.
2.
BallewH., & CunninghamJ. (1982). Discovering strengths and weaknesses of sixth-grade students in solving word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13, 202–210.
3.
BrownA.L., & PalinscarA. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed self-control training. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2,1-18.
4.
CarpenterT.CorbittM.KepnerH.LindquistM., & ReysR. (1980). Solving word problems: Results and implications from national assessment. Arithmetic Teacher, 28, 8–12.
5.
CawleyJ. (1984). An integrative approach to the needs of learning disabled children: Expanded uses of mathematics. In CawleyJ. (Ed.), Developmental teaching of mathematics to the learning disabled.Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
6.
CawleyJ. (1985). Cognition and the learning disabled. In CawleyJ. (Ed.), Cognitive strategies and mathematics for the learning disabled.Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
CawleyJ.NorlanderK.BatesH., & SayreJ. (In progress). Learner activity program: Word problems.Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
9.
Cherkes-JulkowskiM. (1985). Metacognitive considerations in mathematics for the learning disabled. In J. Cawley (Ed.), Cognitive strategies and mathematics for the learning disabled.Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
10.
Executive Summary. (1984). Sixth annual report to Congress on the implementation of Public Law 94–142: The Education of All Handicapped Children's Act. Exceptional Children, 51,199-202.
11.
FleischnerJ., & O'LoughlinM. (1985). Solving story problems: Implications of research for teaching the learning disabled. In CawleyJ. (Ed.), Cognitive strategies and mathematics for the learning disabled.Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
12.
JonesE.KrouseJ.DeoreneD., & SafersteinC. (1985). A comparison of concurrent and sequential instruction of four types of verbal math problems. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 25–31.
MassonM. (1982). A framework of cognitive and metacognitive determinants of reading skill. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2,37-44.
15.
McLeodT., & ArmstrongS. (1982). Learning disabilities in mathematics-skill deficits and remedial approaches at the intermediate and secondary level. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 305–311.
16.
ResnickL., & ResnickD. (1985). Standards, curriculum and performance: A historical and comparative perspective. Educational Researcher, 14, 5–29.
17.
SchoenfieldA.H. (1982). Some thoughts on problemsolving research and mathematics education. In LesterF. & GarofaloJ. (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving: Issues in research (pp. 25–35). Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute.
18.
ShawR. (1981). Diagnosing and using non-word problems as aids to thinking and comprehension. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 1, 73–80.
19.
TorgesenJ. (1982). The learning disabled child as an active learner: Educational implications. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 45–52.
20.
WhimbeyA., & LochheadJ. (1984). Beyond problem solving and comprehension: An exploration of quantitative reasoning.Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute Press.
