Many educators use the term “mildly disabled” to refer to both students with learning disabilities and those with mild mental retardation, who are frequently placed together in classrooms and provided with similar curricula. This study examined the performance of a large sample of students in both groups, age 8–14 years, in four mathematics domains: Basic Concepts, Listening Vocabulary, Problem Solving, and Fractions. Results indicated that the students with learning disabilities scored higher and had greater growth rates than did age-equivalent students with mild mental retardation. Implications for curriculum and instruction include discussions of choice of topic and timing, sequence, and intensity of instruction, particularly regarding the 1989 recommendations of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnastasiA. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
2.
BaroodyA. (1991). Teaching mathematics developmentally. In ReidD. K.HreskoW. P., & SwansonH. L. (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to learning disabilities (pp. 375–430). Austin: Pro-Ed.
3.
CawleyJ. F. (1985). Learning and achievement. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 7, 52–63.
4.
CawleyJ. F.Fitzmaurice-HayesA. M., & ShawR. (1988). Mathematics for the mildly handicapped: A guide to curriculum and instruction. Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
5.
CawleyJ. F.FitzmauriceA. M.ShawR.KahnH., & BatesH. (1979). LD youth and mathematics: A review of characteristics. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 25–41.
6.
CawleyJ. F., & GoodmanJ. O. (1968). Interrelationships among mental abilities, language arts and arithmetic with the mentally handicapped. Arithmetic Teacher, 15, 631–636.
7.
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(4), 250–254.
8.
FornessS. R. (1985). Effects of public policy at the state level: California's impact on MR, LD, and ED categories. Remedial and Special Education, 6(3), 36–43.
9.
FuchsL.BahrC., & ReithH. (1989). Effects of goal structures and performance contingencies on math performance of adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 554–560.
10.
GriseP. J. (1980). Florida's minimum competency testing program for handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 47, 186–193.
11.
GrossmanH. (Ed.). (1973). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.
12.
HewardW. L., & OrlanskyM. D. (1992). Exceptional children (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
13.
LeonJ. A., & PepeH. J. (1983). Self-instructional training: Cognitive behavior modification for remediating arithmetic deficits. Exceptional Children, 50, 54–60.
14.
MacMillanD. L. (1988). Issues in mild mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 23(4), 273–284.
15.
MastropieriM. A.BakkenJ. P., & ScruggsT. E. (1991). Mathematics instruction for individuals with mental retardation: A perspective and research synthesis. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26(2), 115–129.
16.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E., & ShiahS. (1991). Mathematics instruction for learning disabled students: A review of research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6(2), 89–98.
17.
MeyenE. L., & SkrticT. M. (1988). Exceptional children and youth: An introduction. Denver, CO: Love.
18.
MorsinkC. V.Chase-ThomasC., & Smith-DavisJ. (1987). Noncategorical special education programs: Process and outcomes. In WangM. C.ReynoldsM. C., & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), The handbook of special education research and practice (pp. 287–311). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
19.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
20.
ParmarR. S., & CawleyJ. F. (1991). Challenging the routines and passivity that characterize arithmetic instruction for children with mild handicaps. Remedial and Special Education, 12(5), 23–32, 43.
21.
ReynoldsM. C.WangM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1987). The necessary restructuring of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 53, 391–398.
22.
ScottM. S.GreenfieldD. B., & PartridgeM. F. (1991). Differentiating between two groups that fail in school: Performance of learning disabled and mildly retarded students on an oddity problem. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6(1), 3–11.
23.
WarnerM.AlleyG.SchumakerJ.DeshlerD., & ClarkF. (1980). An epidemiological study of learning disabled adolescents in secondary schools: Achievement and ability, socioeconomic and school experiences (Research Report 13). Lawrence, KS: Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities, University of Kansas.
