etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

mathematics curriculum, postsecondary learners also need evidence-based instruction. Analysis of reviews of literature suggests that young adults with learning difficulties benefit from teacher-directed explicit instruction (Deshler et al., 1996). Explicit instruction is characterized by beginning the teaching sequence with a review of the prerequisite skills followed by teacher modeling and guided and independent practice (Archer & Hughes, 2010). During instruction, the teacher presents information in small steps, uses full range of examples and nonexamples, elicits frequent student responses, and provides immediate feedback (e.g., Miller & Hudson, 2007). The effectiveness of explicit instruction for students with learning difficulties has been well documented. For example, Swanson and Hoskyn (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of 180 published intervention studies and found that interventions that included components of explicit instruction resulted in larger effect sizes than those in the comparing conditions. Likewise, the research synthesis by Baker, Gersten, and Lee (2002) indicates that interventions using teacher directed explicit instruction had a positive, moderately strong effect on the mathematics performance of lowachieving students. On the other hand, researchers found that using explicit step-by-step structured instruction is not sufficient for students with disabilities when teaching mathematical skills to solve real-life problems as successful problem solving requires learners to use effective strategies that utilize both cognitive and metacognitive process (Montague, 1997; Reid & Lienemann, 2006). Strategies are often defined as a series of sequenced procedures that allow an individual to complete a task using the awareness and action of planning, implementing, and evaluating the process and outcome (Reid & Lienemann, 2006). Unfortunately, students with disabilities have difficulties selecting and applying appropriate strategies to solve problems because they have a limited awareness of the potential usefulness of the strategies for a given task. Even when they have an idea of the appropriate strategy to use, they use it ineffectively because they often take too much effort to retrieve procedures, operations, and basic mathematic facts, leav- TABLE 1 Three-Step TIP Strategy T: Take a look at the total bill and enter it on the calculator. I: Identify the tip by multiplying the total by 15%. P: Plus the total and find out how much to pay. ing little cognitive resources to process new information (Maccini & Hughes, 1997). Research in the area of cognitive strategy suggest that students with learning difficulties can benefit from strategy instruction focusing on mathematical word problems (e.g., Case, Harris, & Graham, 1992; Montague, 1992) and computation problems (e.g., Brown & Frank, 1990; Rivera & Smith, 1988). However, research in the area of functional mathematical skill acquisition for postsecondary students with disabilities is sparse and unable to guide practice. Recent reviews (Browder & Grasso, 1999; Yan et al., 2005) on teaching money skills for students with disabilities highlighted the needs for additional research that include (a) learners at postsecondary level with academic skills and (b) interventions that address more complex money management skills that require using mathematical computation skills. While the utility of strategy instruction has yet to be proven in the area of functional mathematical skill acquisition it seems to be a logical intervention in this domain for young adults with intellectual disability. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a three-step strategy (TIP) for calculating tip and total bill for learners with disabilities in a postsecondary education program. The TIP strategy includes three essential steps that can be used to calculate tip and total bill in a variety of contexts (e.g., restaurant, hotel, cab). Table 1 presents the three steps of the TIP strategy. The mnemonic device (TIP) may serve as a natural cue to prompt learners to use the strategy in the applied setting. The study extends the literature by examining the utility of strategy instruction as a means for teaching a functional mathematical skill to students with disabilities at postsecondary level. Specifically, we sought to answer the following research questions: 346 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
TABLE 2 Participants Demographic Data by Experimental Condition 1. Can young adults with disabilities acquire and apply the TIP strategy to calculate tip and total bill? 2. Will the learners generalize the procedures of the TIP strategy to solve functional mathematical problems involving percentage values? Method Variable Gender Age Ethnicity Disability IQ Experimental Group Student One Female 21 Caucasian Severe LD, ADHD 82 Student Two Female 22 Caucasian MR 65 Student Three Male 22 Caucasian ASD 74 Student Four Female 18 Caucasian ASD 77 Student Five Female 18 Caucasian ASD 80 Comparison Group Student One Female 24 Caucasian ASD, ADHD 65 Student Two Male 22 Caucasian ASD 72 Student Three Female 20 Caucasian MR, ADHD 63 Student Four Female 21 Caucasian Severe LD 92 Student Five Male 23 Caucasian ASD 69 Note. IQ full scale intelligence quotient scores reported for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for children. Participants and Setting Participants were students enrolled in two classes from a post-secondary education program for young adults with learning and intellectual disability at a Midwestern university. The program provided an integrated collegiate experience including academic coursework, career development, student life, and community life. The program academic coordinator suggested that some students needed additional help with functional mathematical skills in the area of calculating tips and total bill. At the time of the study, all participants took a life skill class as part of the program curriculum. The class covered a variety of skills including social interactions, domestic skills, pre-vocational and vocational skills, as well as daily living skills. Students did not receive any instruction on how to calculate tip and total bill from the courses offered by the program before the intervention. We did not get permission from the program to randomly assign the students to groups as the two classes had different schedules and vocational placement throughout the day. Instead we used a pre- and posttest nonequivalent-groups design to examine the effects of the intervention on acquisition of the tip and bill calculation skill of the participants. To ensure that the participants possessed the prerequisite skills and had difficulties with tip and total bill calculation, we required the students to meet the following inclusion criteria. First, students were able to complete the mathematical computation tasks accurately using a calculator. Second, students must have completed the word problems requiring them to calculate the tip and the total bill on the pretest with accuracy lower than 50%. Five students from one class met the inclusion criteria and participated in the study as an experimental group. We also enrolled five students who met the inclusion criteria from the other class as a comparison group. Table 2 presents a detailed description of each student, including age, gender, ethnicity, IQ score, and disability category. We conducted an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to evaluate comparability of the two groups before the intervention as this research design does not control for interactions between subject selection and other factors including school history and maturation (Campbell & Stanley, 1966). The ANOVA tests showed that there were no significant differences between Functional Mathematical Skill / 3<strong>47</strong>
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Autism an
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
ities. Scholars have argued that do
Page 9 and 10:
discussions were held with 12 addit
Page 11 and 12:
TABLE 1 A Sample of Community Funds
Page 13 and 14:
et al., 2007). At the school, stude
Page 15 and 16:
students opportunities to work and
Page 17 and 18:
Browder, D. M., & Cooper-Duffy, K.
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
of words, and in the short term wer
Page 23 and 24:
TABLE 3 Word Lists List No. Trainin
Page 25 and 26:
TABLE 6 Pairwise Comparisons on Pos
Page 27 and 28:
Word Identification or Word Attack
Page 29 and 30:
erate to severe disabilities. Excep
Page 31 and 32:
ess in a variety of subjects includ
Page 33 and 34:
TABLE 1 Target Vocabulary Words by
Page 35 and 36:
Figure 1. Example of PowerPoint Sli
Page 37 and 38:
TABLE 3 Mean Percentage of Correct
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 4. Jake’s percentages corr
Page 41 and 42:
man-Martin et al. (2005) by demonst
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46: used in the study that did not foll
Page 47 and 48: lected. Stories were read in a quie
Page 49 and 50: y determining the number of interva
Page 51 and 52: with the removal of the interventio
Page 53 and 54: Accordingly, recent research has in
Page 55 and 56: Method Participants Four male child
Page 57 and 58: TABLE 2 Play Scale - Developmental
Page 59 and 60: elated utterances, which were used
Page 61 and 62: Figure 1. Ian’s Progress in Play
Page 63 and 64: Figure 3. Ryan’s Progress in Play
Page 65 and 66: Figure 5. Social Validity: Average
Page 67 and 68: (2000). A comparison of video model
Page 69 and 70: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 71 and 72: Method Participants Four high schoo
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 1 Task Analyses for all Tasks
Page 75 and 76: Figure 1. Holly multiple baseline g
Page 77 and 78: Figure 3. Norman multiple baseline
Page 79 and 80: ing at photographs. Jake only requi
Page 81 and 82: tion, some aspects of the target be
Page 83 and 84: table video aids may lead to greate
Page 85 and 86: TABLE 2 Task Analyses Including Vid
Page 87 and 88: table.” During the session, the t
Page 89 and 90: Figure 2. Percent of steps with err
Page 91 and 92: ter the 15 th session. With table w
Page 93 and 94: our students, it may have been diff
Page 95: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 99 and 100: opening of the lesson, the teacher
Page 101 and 102: TABLE 4 Total Number of Items Answe
Page 103 and 104: Figure 2. Total number of procedura
Page 105 and 106: serve both cognitive (e.g., self in
Page 107 and 108: and quasi-experimental designs for
Page 111 and 112: & Cobb, 2002). Generalization, the
Page 113 and 114: academic activities in the classroo
Page 115 and 116: Procedure Baseline. In this multipl
Page 117 and 118: condition for each student. With th
Page 119 and 120: was repeated across all participant
Page 121 and 122: Boning, R. A. (1997). SRA Specific
Page 125 and 126: TABLE 1 Student demographic informa
Page 127 and 128: ping, dining out, voting) and diffe
Page 129 and 130: TABLE 2 Content Standards, Alternat
Page 131 and 132: Student Achievement Figures 3-6 pro
Page 133 and 134: Figure 4. Student data across math
Page 135 and 136: Figure 6. Student data across math
Page 137 and 138: A second limitation of the current
Page 141 and 142: y students with intellectual disabi
Page 143 and 144: TABLE 1 Studies of Mathematics Inte
Page 145 and 146: subject design to provide an interv
Page 147 and 148:
Neef and colleagues (2003) demonstr
Page 149 and 150:
abilities. Education and Training i
Page 151 and 152:
show all

etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?