This study examined the effects of explicit instruction in the SOLVE Strategy on the mathematical problem solving skills of six Grade 8 students with specific learning disabilities. The SOLVE Strategy is an explicit instruction, mnemonic–based learning strategy designed to help students in solving mathematical word problems. Using a multiple probe across participants design, results suggested a functional relation between explicit instruction in the SOLVE strategy and increase in strategy use and computation scores on grade level mathematical word problems for all participants. Additionally, all participants generalized the SOLVE Strategy to other mathematic topics and concepts, and the teacher and students felt the intervention was socially acceptable. Finally, limitations, implications for practice, and suggestions for future research are discussed.
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. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 97–107.
2.
BlackorbyJ., & WagnerM. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudinal study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399–413.
3.
BryantD. P., BryantB. R., & HammillD. D. (2000). Characteristic behaviors of students with LD who have teacher–identified math weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 168–177.
4.
CarnineD., JonesE. D., & DixonB. (1994). Mathematics: Educational tools for diverse learners. School Psychology Review, 23, 406–427.
5.
CarnineD., & SteinM. (1981). Organizational strategies and practice procedures for teaching basic facts. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 12, 65–69.
6.
CasselA. J., & ReidR. (1996). Use of a self–regulated strategy intervention to improve word problem–solving skills of students with mild disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 153–172.
7.
CawleyJ. F., Baker–KroczynskiS., & UrbanA. (1992). Seeking excellence in mathematics education for students with mild disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 24, 40–43.
8.
CawleyJ. F., ParmerR. S., YanW., & MillerJ. H. (1998). Arithmetic computation performance of students with learning disabilities: Implications for curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 68–74.
9.
CharlesR. I. (1980). Exemplification and characterization moves in the classroom teaching of geometry concepts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 11, 10–21.
10.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers.
11.
CooperJ. O., HeronT. E., & HewardW. L.(2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
12.
DeshlerD. D., AlleyG. R., WarnerM. M., & SchumakerJ. B. (1981). Instructional practices for promoting skill acquisition and generalization in severely learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 415–421.
13.
EnrightB. E. (1987a). Solve, action problem solving: Whole numbers (Book 1). North Billerica, MA: Curriculum Associates.
14.
EnrightB. E. (2004). Algebraic thinking: Foundations teacher's edition. Greensboro, NC: National Training Network, Inc.
GleasonM., CarnineD., & BorieroD. (1990). Improving CAI Effectiveness with Attention to Instructional Design in Teaching Story Problems to Mildly Handicapped Students. Journal of Special Education Technology, 10, 129–136.
17.
GreensteinJ., & StrainsP. S. (1977). The utility of the Keymath Diagnostic Arithmetic Test for adolescent learning disabled students. Psychology in the Schools, 14, 275–282.
18.
HollingsworthM. & WoodwardJ. (1993). Integrated learning: Explicit strategies and their role in problem–solving instruction for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 444–455.
19.
HutchinsonN. L. (1993). Effects of cognitive strategy instruction on algebra problem solving of adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1(6), 34–63.
JitendraA. K., GriffinC., McGoeyK., GardillC, BhatP., & RileyT. (1998). Effects of mathematical word problem solving by students at risk or with mild disabilities. Journal of Educational Research, 91, 345–356.
22.
JitendraA. K., GriffinC., Deatline–BuchmanA., & SczesniakE. (2007). Mathematical word problem solving in third grade classrooms. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 283–302.
23.
JitendraA. K., StarJ. R., StarostaK., LehJ. M., SoodS., CaskieG., HughesC. L., … MackT. R. (2009). Improving seventh grade students’ learning of ratio and proportion: The role of schema–based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 250–264
24.
LeinhardtG. (1987). Development of an expert explanation: An analysis of a sequence of subrations lessons. Cognition and Instruction, 4, 225–282.
25.
LichtensteinS. (1993). Transition from school to adulthood: Case studies of adults with learning disabilities who dropped out of school. Exceptional Children, 59, 336–347.
26.
MacciniP., & HughesC. A. (2000). Effects of a problem solving strategy on the introductory algebra performance of secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 10–21.
27.
MacciniP., & RuhlK. L. (2000). Effects of graduated instructional sequence on the algebraic subtraction of integers by secondary students with disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 465–489.
28.
MacciniP., McNaughtonD., & RuhlK. (1999). Algebra instruction for students with learning disabilities: Implications from a research review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 113–126.
29.
MastropieriM., ScruggsT., & ButcherK. (1997). How effective is inquiry learning for students with mild disabilities?The journal of Special Education, 31, 199–211.
30.
MercerC. D., LaneH. B, JordanL., AllsoppD. H., & EilseleM. R. (1996). Empowering teachers and students with instructional choices in inclusion settings. Remedial and Special Education, 17(4), 226–236.
31.
MillerS. P., & MercerC. D. (1997). Educational aspects of mathematics disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 47–56.
32.
MontagueM., & BosC. S. (1986). The effect of cognitive strategy training on verbal math problem solving performance of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 26–33.
33.
MontagueM., BosC. S., & DoucetteM. (1991). Affective, cognitive, and metacognitive attributes of eighth–grade mathematical problem solvers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 145–151.
34.
MontagueM. (1992). The effects of cognitive and metacognitive strategy instruction on the mathematical problem solving of middle school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 230–248.
35.
MontagueM., EndersC., DietzS. (2011). Effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 262–272.
36.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The Nation's Report Card: Mathematics 2011 (NCES 2012–458). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
37.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
38.
ResnickL. B., Cauzinille–MarmecheE., & MathieuJ. (1987). Understanding algebra. In SlobodaJ. A., & RogersD. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in mathematics (pp. 169–203). Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
39.
ScheuermannA. M., DeshlerD. D., & SchumakerJ. B. (2009). The effects of the explicit inquiry routine on the performance of students with learning disabilities on one–variable equations. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(2), 103–120.
40.
SchumakerJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (2006). Teaching adolescents to be strategic learners. In DeshlerD. D., & SchumakerJ. B. (Eds.), Teaching adolescents with disabilities. New York: Corwin.
41.
SchumakerJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (1992). Validation of learning strategy interventions for students with LD: Results of a programmatic research effort. In WongB. Y. L. (Ed.), Contemporary research with students with learning disabilities: An international perspective (pp. 22–46). New York: Springer–Verlag.
42.
ScruggsT. E., MastropieriM. A., BerkeleyS. L., & MarshakL. (2010). Mnemonic strategies: Evidence–based practice and practice–based evidence. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 79–86.
43.
SwansonH.L. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta–analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: The Guilford Press
44.
SwansonH., & DeshlerD. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: converting a meta–analysis to practice. Journal Of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 124–135.
45.
ThurlowM., AlbusD., SpicuzzaR., & ThompsonS. (1998). Participation and performance of students with disabilities: Minnesota's 1996 Basic Standards Tests in reading and math (Minnesota Report 16). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
46.
ThurlowM. L., MoenR. E., & WileyH. I. (2005). Annual performance reports: 2002–2003: State assessment data. Minneapolis, MN: National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved August 17, 2005, from http://education.umn.edu/nceo/OnlinePubs/APRsummary2005.pdf
47.
WarnerM., AlleyG., SchumakerJ., DeshlerD., & ClarkF. (1980). An epidemiological study of learning disabled adolescents in secondary schools: Achievement and ability, socioeconomic status and school experience (No. 13). Lawrence: University of Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
48.
WatanabeA. (1991). The effects of a mathematical word problem solving strategy on problem solving performance by middle school students with mild disabilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
49.
WoodcockR. W., McGrewK. S., & MatherN. (2001). Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
50.
XinY. P., JitendraA. K., & Deatline–BuchmanA. (2005). Effects of mathematical word problem solving instruction on students with learning problems. Journal of Special Education, 39(3), 181–192.
