When students arrive at content classes reading below grade level, teachers are challenged to deliver complex content. Also, students often study facts without reaching larger concepts. Research at the University of Oregon has concluded that if the teacher takes responsibility for identifying and elucidating the concept within course materials, both of these difficulties can be overcome. Overt identification of concepts and their characteristics and the deliberate use of graphic organizers reduce the reading comprehension demands placed on students with low abilities. Using the functional taxonomy presented, teachers can develop effective student exercises and assessments. An example shows that students provided with the concept-based approach outperformed students in a more traditional classroom on a problem-solving task.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boudah, D.J., Lenz, B.K., Bulgren, J.A., Schumaker, J.B., & Deshler, D.D. (2000). Don't water down! Enhance: Content learning through the unit organizer routine. Teaching Exceptional Children , 32(3), 48—56.
2.
Bryant, D.P., Ugel, N., Thompson, S., & Hamff, A. (1999). Instructional strategies for content-area reading instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34(5), 293—302.
3.
Ellis, E. (1994). Integrating writing strategy instruction with content-area instruction: Part 1—orienting students to organizational devices. Intervention in School & Clinic, 29(3), 169—180.
4.
Erickson, H.L. (1998). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
5.
Garner, R., Gillingham, M.G., & White, C.S. (1989). Effects of “seductive details” on macroprocessing and microprocessing in adults and children. Cognition and Instruction6(1), 41—57.
6.
Hudson, P., Lignugaris-Kraft, B., & Miller, T. (1993). Using content enhancements to improve the performance of adolescents with learning disabilities in content classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8(2), 106—126.
7.
Jitendra, A.K., Nolet, V., Xin, Y.P., Gomez, O., Renouf, K., Iskold, L., et al. (2001). An analysis of middle school geography textbooks: Implications for students with learning problems. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 17, 151—173.
8.
Kameenui, E.J., & Carnine, D.W. (1998). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.
Merkley, D.M., & Jefferies, D. (2000/2001). Guidelines for implementing a graphic organizer. ReadingTeacher, 54(4), 350—357.
10.
Roid, G.H., & Haladyna, T.M. (1982). The emergence of an item-writing technology. Review of Educational Research, 50, 293—314.
11.
Tindal, G., Nolet, V.W., & Blake, G. (1992). Focus on teaching and learning in content classes: Training module number 3. Eugene: University of Oregon, Research, Consultation, and Teaching Program.
12.
Tyree, R.B., Fiore, T.A., & Cook, R.A. (1994). Instructional materials for diverse learners: Features and considerations for textbook design. Remedial and Special Education, 15(6), 363—377.
13.
University of Victoria, Counseling Services. ( 1996). Learning Skills Program: Bloom's taxonomy. Retrieved July 19, 2002, from http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/program/hndouts/bloom.html
14.
Voltz, D.L., Brazil, N., & Ford, A. (2001). What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide for moving forward. Intervention in School and Clinic , 37, 23—30.
