Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Technology has changed the practices related to teaching and learning mathematics in schools. The demand for learning mathematics in virtual environments is increasing in the 21st-century classroom. There has been widespread expansion of the use of technology in education. This column reviews three types of instruction—synchronous, asynchronous, and blended—and provides applied examples regarding the use of virtual manipulatives in teaching mathematics to students with learning disabilities.

Keywords

asynchronous instruction blended instruction mathematics synchronous instruction virtual manipulatives

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bassette

Bouck

Shurr

Park

Cremeans

Rork

Miller

Geiser

(2020). A comparison of manipulative use on mathematics efficiency in elementary students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 35(4), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419854504

Bouck

E. C.

Anderson

R. D.

Long

Sprick

(2021). Manipulative-based instructional sequences in mathematics for students with disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 54, 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059921994599

Bouck

E. C.

Sprick

(2019). The virtual-representational-abstract framework to support students with disabilities in mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(3), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451218767911

Branon

R. F.

Essex

(2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education. TechTrends, 45(1), 36–42.

CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org

Chappell

Arnold

Nunnery

Grant

(2015). An examination of an online tutoring program’s impact on low-achieving middle school students’ mathematics achievement. Online Learning, 19(5), 37–53.

Coy

Marino

M. T.

Serianni

(2014). Using universal design for learning in synchronous online instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900105

Hjalmarson

M. A.

(2017). Learning to teach mathematics specialists in a synchronous online course: A self-study. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 20(3), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9323-x

Kiru

E. W.

Doabler

C. T.

Sorrells

A. M.

Cooc

N. A.

(2018). A synthesis of technology-mediated mathematics interventions for students with or at risk for mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417745835

10.

Magoulès

Venet

(2018). Asynchronous iterative sub-structuring methods. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 145, 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2016.05.009

11.

Martin

Polly

Ritzhaupt

(2020). Bichronous online learning: Blending asynchronous and synchronous online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/9/bichronous-online-learning-blending-asynchronous-and-synchronous-online-learning

12.

McLeskey

Barringer

M.-D.

Billingsley

Brownell

Jackson

Kennedy

Lewis

Maheady

Rodriguez

Scheeler

M. C.

Winn

Ziegler

(2017). High-leverage practices in special education. Council for Exceptional Children & CEEDAR Center.

13.

Moyer-Packenham

P. S.

Bolyard

J. J.

(2016). Revisiting the definition of a virtual manipulative. In Moyer-Packenham

P. S.

(Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–23). Springer.

14.

Muir

(2021). Self-determination theory and the flipped classroom: A case study of a senior secondary mathematics class. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 33, 569–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00320-3

15.

M. W.

Bryant

D. P.

Bryant

B. R.

(2020). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the research. Exceptionality, 28(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2019.1579723

16.

Park

Bouck

E. C.

Fisher

M. H.

(2021). Using the virtual–representational–abstract with overlearning instructional sequence to students with disabilities in mathematics. The Journal of Special Education, 54(4), 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466920912527

17.

Park

Bryant

D. P.

Shin

(2021). Effects of interventions using virtual manipulatives for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of single-case research. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211006336

18.

Phillips

Pane

J. F.

Reumann-Moore

Shenbanjo

(2020). Implementing an adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an instructional supplement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1409–1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09745-w

19.

Rice

M. F.

(2018). Supporting literacy with accessibility: Virtual school course designers’ planning for students with disabilities. Online Learning, 22(4), 161–179. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1202365.pdf

20.

Root

J. R.

Cox

S. K.

Gilley

Wade

(2021). Using a virtual-representational-abstract integrated framework to teach multiplicative problem solving to middle school students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51, 2284–2296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04674-2

21.

Satsangi

Hammer

Hogan

C. D.

(2018). Studying virtual manipulatives paired with explicit instruction to teach algebraic equations to students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 41(4), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948718769248

22.

Shin

Bryant

D. P.

Bryant

B. R.

McKenna

J. W.

Hou

M. W.

(2017). Virtual manipulatives: Tools for teaching mathematics to students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(3), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216644830

23.

Shin

Park

Grimes

Bryant

D. P.

(2021). Effects of using virtual manipulatives for students with disabilities: Three-level multilevel modeling for single-case data. Exceptional Children, 87, 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029211007150

24.

Tsuei

(2017). Learning behaviours of low-achieving children’s mathematics learning in using of helping tools in a synchronous peer-tutoring system. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1276078

25.

Vidergor

H. E.

Ben-Amram

(2020). Khan academy effectiveness: The case of math secondary students’ perceptions. Computers & Education, 157, 103985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103985

26.

Watson

(2008). Blended learning: The convergence of online and face-to-face education. Promising practices in online learning. North American Council for Online Learning. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509636.pdf

27.

Wright

J. C.

Knight

V. F.

Barton

E. E.

(2020). A review of video modeling to teach STEM to students with autism and intellectual disability. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 70, 101476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.101476

28.

Yang

Chen

N. S.

(2019). Using blended synchronous classroom approach to promote learning performance in rural area. Computers & Education, 141, 103619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103619

29.

Young

(2017). Technology-enhanced mathematics instruction: A second-order meta-analysis of 30 years of research. Educational Research Review, 22, 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.07.001

Mathematics Instruction for Students With Learning Disabilities: Applied Examples Using Virtual Manipulatives

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References