A review of six published studies on algebra interventions for students with learning disabilities (LD) revealed that successful interventions included instruction on domain-specific knowledge, as well as general problem-solving and self-regulation strategies. Promising practices include sequential introduction of word problems through concrete, semi-concrete, and abstract phases, and peer feedback. Use of selected computer-assisted programs also may hold promise. These findings are discussed in the context of the requirements of successful algebra performance, developmental problem-solving literature (Mayer, 1989; Schoenfeld, 1992), and characteristics of students with LD.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlgozzineB.O'SheaD. J.CrewsW. B.StoddardK. (1987). Analysis of mathematics competence of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Special Education, 21, 97–107.
2.
BereiterC.ScardamaliaM. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.
3.
BlankenshipC. S.LovittT. C. (1976). Story problems: Merely confusing or downright befuddling?Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 7, 290–298.
4.
BottgeB. A.HasselbringT. S. (1993). A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, 59, 556–566.
5.
BrownA. L.PalincsarA. S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 1–17.
6.
CawleyJ. F.MillerJ. H. (1989). Cross-sectional comparisons of the mathematical performance of children with learning disabilities: Are we on the right track toward comprehensive programming?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 250–259.
7.
CawleyJ. F.ParmarR. S.YanW. F.MillerJ. H. (1996). Arithmetic computation abilities of students with learning disabilities: Implications for instruction. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 230–237.
8.
ChambersD. L. (1994). The right algebra for all. Educational Leadership, 51, 85–86.
9.
EllisE. S. E.WorthingtonL. A. (1994). Research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators (Technical Report No. 5). Eugene: University of Oregon. National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.
10.
EngelmannS.CamineD.SteelyD. G. (1991). Making connections in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 292–303.
11.
GrossenB. (1996). How should we group to achieve excellence with equity?Effective School Practices, 15, 2–15.
12.
HofmeisterA. M. (1993). Elitism and reform in school mathematics. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 8–13.
13.
HuntingtonD. J. (1994). Instruction in concrete, semi-concrete, and abstract representation as an aid to the solution of relational problems by adolescents with learning disabilities (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56/02, 512.
14.
HutchinsonN. L. (1987). Strategies for teaching learning disabled adolescents algebraic problems. Reading Writing and Learning Disabilities, 3, 63–74.
15.
HutchinsonN. L. (1989, April). The effects of small group instruction in algebra problem-solvingPaper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
16.
HutchinsonN. L. (1993). Effects of cognitive strategy instruction on algebra problems solving of adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 34–63.
17.
HutchinsonN. L.HemingwayP. (1987). Teaching representation and solution of algebraic word problem to learning disabled adolescents (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 293 272).
18.
HyndG. W.MarshallR.GonzalezJ. (1991). Learning disabilities and presumed central nervous system dysfunction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 283–296.
19.
JenkinsJ. J. (1979). Four points to remember: A tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In CermakL. S.CraikF. I. M. (Eds.), Levels and processing in human memory (pp. 429–446). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
KieranC. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In GrouwsD. A. (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390–419). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
21.
KitzW. R.ThorpeH. W. (1995). A comparison of the effectiveness of videodisk and traditional algebra instruction for college-age students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 295–306.
22.
LessenE.DudzinskiM.KarshK.AckerR. V. (1989). A survey of ten years of academic intervention research with learning disabled students: Implications for research and practice. Learning Disabilities Focus, 4, 106–122.
23.
MayerR. E. (1985). The elusive search for teachable aspects of problem-solving. In GloverJ. A.RonningR. R. (Eds.), Historical foundations of educational psychology (pp. 327–347). New York: Plenum.
24.
MayerR. E. (1989). Special section: Cognition and instruction in mathematics—introduction to the special section. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 452–456.
25.
McCuskerC. E. (1995). The Americans with Disabilities Act: Its potential for expanding the scope of reasonable academic accommodations. Journal of College and University Law, 21(4), 619–641.
26.
MercerC. D.HarrisC.MillerS. P. (1993). Reforming reforms in mathematics. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 14–19.
27.
MercerC. D.MercerA. R. (1989). Teaching students with learning problems (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan.
28.
MercerC. D.MillerS. P. (1992). Teaching students with learning problems in math to acquire, understand, and apply basic math facts. Remedial and Special Education, 13, 19–35, 61.
29.
MillerS. P.MercerC. D. (1997). Educational aspects of mathematics disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 47–56.
30.
MontagueM. (1988). Strategy instruction and mathematical problem-solving. Reading Writing and Learning Disabilities, 4, 275–290.
31.
MontagueM.BosC. S. (1990). Cognitive and metacognitive characteristics of eighth grade students' mathematical problem-solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 2, 371–388.
32.
MontagueM.BosC. S.DoucetteM. (1991). Affective, cognitive, and metacognitive attributes of eighth-grade mathematical problem solvers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 145–151.
33.
National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics. (1988). Twelve components of essential mathematics. Minneapolis: Author.
34.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
35.
PicciottoH. (1990). The algebra lab. Sunnyvale, CA: Creative Publications.
36.
PressleyM.McCormickC. B. (1995). Advanced educational psychology for educators, researchers, and policy makers. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
37.
PolyaG. (1957). How to solve it. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.
38.
PulsinelliL.HooperP. (1991). Intermediate algebra: An interactive approach (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan.
39.
RiveraD. M. (1993). Examining mathematics reform and the implications for students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 24–27.
40.
RosenshineB. (1983). Teaching functions in instructional programs. Elementary School Journal, 83, 335–351.
41.
RosenshineB.StevensR. (1986). Teaching functions. In WhittrockM. C. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376–391) New York: Macmillan.
42.
RosmanN. J. S. (1994). Effects of varying the special educator's role within an algebra class on math attitude and achievement. Vermillion: University of South Dakota. (ERIC Reproduction Document ED 381 993).
43.
SaundersH. (1980). When are we ever gonna have to use this?Mathematics Teacher, 7–16.
44.
SchoenfeldA. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem-solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In GrouwsD. A. (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
45.
SlavinR. E. (1997). Design competitions and expert panels: Similar objectives, very different paths. Educational Researcher, 26, 21–22.
46.
System Impact, Inc. (1989). Mastering equations, roots and exponents: Signed numbers to operations. Gaithersburg, MD: Author.
47.
ThorntonC. A.BleyN. S. (1994). Windows of opportunity. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
48.
WongB. Y. L. (1996). The ABCs of learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
49.
ZawaizaT. R. W.GerberM. M. (1993). Effects of explicit instruction on math word-problem-solving by community college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 64–79.
