Differentiating Study Guides

Abstract

Study guides are a popular and frequently student-requested instructional support developed primarily by upper elementary, middle, and high school teachers to help students navigate through a course of study. With the increase of the number of learners with diverse needs in general education classrooms, teachers need to be mindful of various ways to differentiate study guides, that is, make adjustments that maintain the integrity of student outcomes while offering choices and respecting each learner’s background knowledge, skill-level, interests, and learning preferences. Specifically, teachers can differentiate study guides by adjusting questions and content, providing different kinds of study guides, allowing students to demonstrate knowledge in different ways, reinforcing student efforts, and allowing students to use classroom materials and space in various ways. This article presents ways teachers can apply the components of differentiation to maximize the use of study guides in inclusive classrooms.

Keywords

instruction accommodations intervention academic access to general education curriculum

With the steady increase in the percentage of students with disabilities receiving the majority of their instruction in general education classrooms (U.S. Department of Education, 2014), teachers are investigating ways to differentiate learning tasks while promoting student access to the general curriculum. Study guides are a flexible instructional tool to differentiate learning while helping students access critical information (Salyer, Curran, & Thyfault, 2002).

Study guides are an important instructional tool for several reasons. First, as students progress from upper elementary through high school, they must independently meet increasingly rigorous literacy-based curricular demands requiring the efficient use of textbooks and other course-specific resources. Study guides scaffold instruction by supporting students’ transition in meeting these increased demands. Second, some textbooks present abstract information and are written at advanced readability levels (Salyer et al., 2002). Study guides often identify critical vocabulary, guide student reading, review concepts (J. W. Wood, 2006), and motivate students to interact with the material (Gore, 2004). Last, students with disabilities often need support conceptualizing big ideas and details, organizing information, and retaining content. Study guides present the text structure (Salyer et al., 2002), discriminate between critical and less important information (Gore, 2004), and provide a study support system (J. W. Wood, 2006). For these and other reasons, many students find study guides appealing (Gore, 2004).

Research Base

Researchers have investigated the use of study guides for more than 25 years. In the first of a series of early studies, Horton, Lovitt, Givens, and Nelson (1989) noted the effectiveness of a computerized study guide, compared to student note taking, when assessing social studies textbook comprehension with two groups of high school struggling readers. Students in both groups using the computerized study guide significantly outperformed those taking notes. Similarly, Horton and Lovitt (1989) conducted two studies to examine the effectiveness of study guides with students with and without learning disabilities (LD) in secondary social studies and science classes. Results confirmed that students using teacher- or student-directed study guides significantly outperformed those using their own self-study methods.

Studying four high school students with LD in a remedial high school social studies class, Horton, Boone, and Lovitt (1990) investigated student use of a computer-based study guide using hypertext software to increase textbook comprehension. Students using the computer-based guide made significant gains from pre- to posttest and from pretest to retention test. Last, Boone and Higgins (1992) discovered that hypermedia computer study guides were as effective as teacher-presented lectures for high school students with LD and reading challenges. Furthermore, Fisher, Schumaker, and Deshler (1995) summarized three studies in which students with and without LD improved quiz scores when using study guides. Collectively, results from these studies signal the importance of providing study guides to all students.

More recently, researchers have grouped study guides under the classification of content enhancements, which are adaptations or techniques that help students identify, organize, understand, and remember information. Specifically, authors have referred to study guides as a device as they are an instructional technique designed to achieve a singular goal in promoting learning (Deshler, Ellis, & Lenz, 1996). Devices such as study guides have received wide empirical support as an effective overall content enhancement, especially with secondary students with mild disabilities (University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning, 2009).

Developing Study Guides

Developing study guides requires teacher forethought and planning. Several authors (e.g., Masters, Mori, & Mori, 1999; J. W. Wood, 2006) have suggested steps for teachers to implement when developing study guides. Some of these steps include the following:

Assess the need for a study guide. Not all reading assignments require a study guide. Students require more support when (a) the text is written at an advanced reading level, (b) the narrative introduces many new vocabulary terms or abstract concepts, (c) students must use inferential comprehension skills, (d) students have limited background knowledge on the topic, or (e) the text structure is new or confusing. We suggest teachers provide study guides when students transition from narrative to expository text, which often includes technical vocabulary and abstract concepts (Hollingsead, Ostrander, & Schilling, 2004). However, based on these variables, not all students require a study guide. In a cotaught classroom, both teachers make this decision based on their knowledge of students and the curriculum. Alternatively, if the general education teacher does not provide a study guide, special educators often develop study guides for students on their caseloads to support their access to the general education curriculum.

Determine critical outcomes and vocabulary words or concepts based on content area, district, or other standards. Because students with disabilities often have difficulty discerning important from unimportant main ideas and facts (Heward, 2013), teachers can select the most essential vocabulary terms and big ideas from the text that form the foundation for understanding the discipline. This helps students with attention issues and language-based disabilities focus as they navigate through the text. Initially, some teachers develop a planning pyramid (Schumm, Vaughn, & Leavell, 1994), which facilitates planning differentiated learning outcomes and activities. This pyramid indicates outcomes expected of all, most, and some students. All students are expected to master core concepts, big ideas, and critical vocabulary represented on the triangle base, shown in Figure 1 from a middle school unit on the Gold Rush. The remaining two levels indicate greater complexity, detail, and knowledge or skill outcomes. Explicitly writing outcomes at various levels helps teachers ensure that they hold all students accountable for the core curriculum while challenging more advanced learners.

Write questions requiring students to interact with critical outcomes and important reading processes. First, consider the reading and writing processes students will use. For example, will all, most, or some students write short answers, fill-in-the-blank words, or letters? Will all, most, or some need to read closely for details, skim for dates or names, or infer meanings? Next, based on the text sequence, write questions that engage students with previously determined big ideas and vocabulary terms. Can questions be adapted at different levels of cognitive challenge? Figure 2 provides a basic, midlevel, and challenge-level study guide based on these principles. Varying questions by comprehension skill (e.g., locate a fact, describe, compare and contrast, apply) and text feature use (e.g., charts, graphs, pictures, glossary) encourages students to attend to critical text features while learning important subject-matter content.

Develop a student-friendly format. Students are less likely to complete and later reference their study guide as a study tool if it is poorly written, confusing, or requires considerable writing. Conderman and Bresnahan (2010) proposed student-friendly writing tips. Some of those tips include (a) provide supports such as page numbers for answers, word banks, adequate space for answers, clear directions, examples of competed items, and learning objectives or purpose statements, (b) reduce writing demands by avoiding lengthy essay questions, having students write vocabulary words after a given definition, and including response formats that require short written responses, and (c) break two-part questions into single questions to focus the learner’s attention on a single piece of information. Applying these writing suggestions takes time. Horton and Lovitt (1989) suggested that teachers reserve 30 minutes for preparing a 15-item study guide. Fisher et al. (1995) noted that most study guides require 50 to 60 minutes to write.

Figure 1.

Planning pyramid.

Figure 2.

Three levels of a study guide.

These steps and tips are helpful for developing study guides and making some adjustments for students with disabilities. However, to meet the needs of students in an inclusive setting, teachers benefit from considering the questions and suggestions posed in Table 1 when differentiating study guides. These considerations provide a broader scope of components to consider when providing differentiated instruction.

Table 1.

Questions and Suggestions for Teachers to Consider When Differentiating Study Guides.

Question	Suggestions
How can I determine my students’ experiences with study guides?	Conduct a class discussion; survey students; ask previous teachers and parents.
How can I adjust the content on my study guides to account for differences in student background knowledge while maintaining course standards?	First determine the big ideas that all students should learn. Then, add details, advanced skills, or other interesting information that some students will learn, and finally determine even more advanced concepts for advanced learners. Adjust question types to correspond with Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al., 2001).
How can I design study guides that respect the range of student reading and writing skill levels?	Adjust writing requirements for more and less skilled writers; adjust the reading level and language complexity of questions by writing more direct and shorter questions; vary the type of comprehension questions.
What are some ways I can vary learning activities on the study guide?	Ask some opinion questions; embed partner activities; include graphic organizers; provide visuals; allow students to illustrate some answers.
How can I use technology to support student work on study guides?	Use web-based resources from the textbook authors; develop electronic study guides; allow students to use their devices for completion and submission.
How can I offer some student choice associated with study guide completion?	Allow pairs to collaborate; allow students to print or type responses; include some challenge or extra credit questions.
What means of assessment can I offer that measure intended learning outcomes without penalizing students for their disabilities?	Grade study guide on completion rather than spelling; allow extra time if needed; allow alternative response mode (i.e., verbal responses); allow dictated responses.
What are some ways I can use classroom space to encourage study guide completion?	Allow use of various work spaces; repurpose reading nook or other areas; have enrichment materials accessible throughout classroom.

Differentiated Instruction

When teachers differentiate, they respond to individual differences, provide multiple avenues to learning, and offer student choices within flexible grouping systems while maintaining rigorous standards (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). Consequently, specialized instruction becomes the norm for all students. Within such specialization, students with disabilities have access to accommodations or if necessary, modifications, while students who excel are appropriately challenged (Friend & Bursuck, 2015).

Tomlinson and Imbeau (2010) specified five categories that teachers can differentiate, which include (a) content—what students learn and how students access information, (b) process—how students learn through purposeful activities that respect their readiness, interest, choice, strength, and learning preferences, (c) product—how students demonstrate their learning, (d) affect—the classroom tone, and (e) learning environment—the flexible way space is used.

Considering the popular use of study guides and these five categories, an important question arises: What are some specific ways teachers can differentiate study guides that enable all students to access critical content and display their knowledge in various ways while working within a supportive and flexible learning space? The following section provides an array of suggestions for teachers as they consider differentiating study guides.

Differentiating Study Guides by Content

In all five differentiation categories, the first step for teachers is to examine student assessment data that will inform differentiation practices. When differentiating content, teachers review each student’s reading, writing, and math levels from standardized, norm-referenced tests and data noted in the student’s individualized education program (IEP) to determine curriculum accessibility needs. They also analyze pretest data associated with the upcoming unit to plan and develop appropriately leveled materials and activities. These data typically are based on informal assessments such as K-W-L (i.e., What Do I Know, Want to Learn, and What Did I Learn) charts (Ogle, 1989), anticipation guides (Kozen, Murray, & Windell, 2006), pretests, probes, exit slips, performance-based assessments, self-assessments, and other tools (Conderman & Hedin, 2012). Because student performance changes over time, scores may or may not represent a student’s current skill set (Lenz, Deshler, & Kissam, 2004). This step is a collaborative effort in cotaught classrooms, with special educators taking the lead in summarizing data for students with IEPs.

Pretests should contain a sufficient number and variety of items for teachers to make judgements about student’s skills. At least one question should be included for each unit objective. For math, to provide adequate sampling and control for student carelessness, Masters et al. (1999) recommended developing three items for each skill if the test is untimed and one item for each skill if the test is timed. After analyzing assessment data, teachers can consider the following ways to differentiate study guide’s content and accessibility:

Reduce the number of study guide questions by including only the most critical concepts associated with big ideas. This provides a more efficient forum for reading and studying, especially for students with processing and organizational issues such as those with LD, attention issues, or intellectual disabilities.

Offer a text that meets standards but is written at an adjusted reading level for those with reading or comprehension disabilities.

Use digital texts, ebooks, or audiobooks. CD-based texts often provide pronunciation guides, text-to-speech supports, vocabulary support, and options to change text format to improve readability. Teach students how to use these tools using cue-cards, video-modeling, and guided practice with a partner. Grade-level teams often decide when that primary instruction should occur with special educators supporting students who have assistive technologies noted on their IEP. Teachers often handle logistics by establishing a classroom routine on days when technologies are used. They can upload differentiated study guides to student accounts if Chromebooks are used without students knowing that different formats exist.

Eliminate the requirement to complete part or all of the study guide for students who perform above grade level expectations. Students with a very high degree of knowledge and understanding can test out of the unit or parts of the unit and contract for enrichment or accelerated activities (Friend & Bursuck, 2015).

Vary the type of questions. Vary the number and type of “in-my-head” comprehension questions (i.e., questions requiring the student to think beyond what is stated explicitly in the text) and “in the book” questions (i.e., questions that contain answers directly from the passage) for students with various comprehension skills (Raphael, 1986).

Differentiate math study guides by including problems with more or fewer steps, smaller or larger numbers, some steps completed, an example problem completed, or a strategy or mnemonic available for convenient student access (Conderman, Hedin, & Bresnahan, 2013).

Differentiating Study Guides by Process

Teachers use student skill assessment data and results from student questionnaires to differentiate by process (i.e., activities). For example, students can complete sentence stems such as those noted in Table 2 to report study guide learning preferences. Teachers must be honest with students about which parts of the curriculum, instruction, or assessment they can alter to accommodate student preferences and which parts they cannot change (Lenz et al., 2004).

Table 2.

Student Questionnaire.

If I had choices regarding completing my study guide:

I would like to work: (a) by myself; (b) with the teacher; (c) with a partner; (d) with a small group

I would like to: (a) write my answers; (b) dictate my answers; (c) draw my answers; (d) highlight answers electronically

I would like to work: (a) at my own desk; (b) at study carol; (c) in the hall; (d) at the reading kidney table

I would like to use: (a) the class headsets; (b) a computer; (c) our text; (d) an electronic text

I think I can be successful if I: (a) can do a few questions and have those questions corrected before I complete the rest; (b) listen to the reading section first; (c) have hints (like page numbers) on my study guide; (d) can work on the study guide at home

Based on student skill assessment data and student survey responses, one way to differentiate by process is to provide different kinds of study guides, or at least some different types of questions and activities, on the study guide. Several researchers (Gore, 2004; Skylar, Higgins, & Boone, 2007; K. D. Wood, 1995) have described various types of study guides. Six of these include the following:

Independent study guides: These support student reading through the text without providing scaffolds or supports. Consequently, these guides are appropriate for students with grade-level or above reading skills.

Prompted study guides: These guides often contain the same (or similar) questions as independent guides with scaffolds such as page numbers, word banks, the first letter for fill-in-the-blank questions, bolded words, highlighted important text sections, and explicit instructions for using electronic features. These guides are appropriate for learners who are not yet independent with grade-level text.

Interactive study guides: These are completed by students in pairs or small groups first, and then students discuss responses as a whole group. These guides (or questions) promote student collaboration, social skills, and verbal and written sharing of ideas and can be used in heterogeneous learning groups.

Learning from text guides: These include a series of questions on a specific idea that proceed from factual level to higher level prompts. Therefore, they promote deeper concept understanding and are often linked to application activities. They are appropriate for students with grade-level comprehension skills.

Textbook activity guides: These guides periodically ask students to reflect on the information and identify their level of understanding. They are useful for students with self-regulation or comprehension goals (Zimmerman, 2001).

Electronic study guides: These guides are designed in a hypertext format and are completed by students on their electronic device. Students have access to prescreened websites, supplemental and updated information on the topic, and supplemental video and audio clips.

These can be used by all students with sufficient modeling and practice. Questions representing four of these types of study guides, based on the Gold Rush unit, are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Examples of Differentiated Questions on Four Types of Study Guides.

Prompted
1. p. 77 The name of the man who first found gold was J________ M________.
2. p. 78 What was the result of the Compromise of 1850?

Interactive
With your partner, discuss and then write short responses to these questions:
1. Explain the role of James Marshall and the Gold Rush.
2. What were two advantages of California becoming a state as a result of the Compromise of 1850?

Learning from text
1a. Who first found gold in California that led to the Gold Rush?
1b. Why do you think he wanted to keep his discovery a secret?
1c. Why do you think people were willing to leave everything to move out West?
1d. Think of an example in our time when people quickly dashed to get valuable goods or services.

Textbook activity
After reading “Beginnings of the Gold Rush” on pages 77–79, answer these questions:
1. What is the main idea of this section?
2. List two details that support your main idea.
Circle the statement that fits your understanding of this section:
I understand this section fully and am ready to read the next section.
I understand most of this section, but I need help with:________
I do not understand this section and need a lot of help.

In addition to varying the type of study guide (or questions on the study guide), teachers can differentiate by process by:

Embed different hands-on activities within the study guide. Short meaningful breaks are especially helpful for students with disabilities as they allow physical movement, interaction with classroom materials, and reinforcement of learning.

Allow student choice for completing enrichment activities during or following completion of the study guide or sections of the study guide. This could be part of a positive reinforcement intervention for students with emotional or behavioral issues who need support with work completion.

Use interest-based groups, having students research a chosen related topic. This capitalizes on specialized interests of students, such as those with Autism Spectrum Disorder (Heward, 2013).

Differentiating Study Guides by Product

Teachers need to decide whether or not they will require students to submit the study guide and whether or not they will grade the study guide. Teachers should share these decisions with students prior to assigning the study guide. These decisions are based on the purpose of the study guide, the teacher’s philosophy about grading, and school or department procedures (Munk, 2003). Regardless of the decision, students who complete the guide should perform better on the assessment than those who do not. Teachers can differentiate study guides by product in various ways, as long as students perceive choices as being fair. Some ways to differentiate study guides by product include the following:

Allowing students to submit their study guide in paper form or electronically. This option is especially helpful for students with fine-motor issues.

Allowing students to submit parts of the study guide in sections to receive feedback prior to completing subsequent sections. Students with anxiety-related issues or comprehension issues often find this choice helpful.

Providing some student choice in deciding which work samples within a unit will count for a predetermined portion of the grade. Grade options are appealing for students with emotional/behavioral issues as some experience anxiety regarding one type of assessment (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2010).

Allowing submission of a correctly completed study guide to “counter” a previously earned poor score on a similar assignment with an equivalent grade weight value.

Allowing students to demonstrate understanding of study guide sections by conferencing with the teacher, drawing the concept or meaning of vocabulary words, or acting out the concept. Offering alternative response approaches allows students time to think, respond, and organize their learning which promotes self-regulation (Zimmerman, 2001).

Determining if the study guide will be graded in different ways for different students. Alternative grading procedures are typically made by members of the student’s IEP team and are documented in the IEP.

Differentiating Study Guides by Affect

Teachers who differentiate by affect are aware of the tone in their classrooms and the effect tone has on student behavior and learning. They also recognize that they need to monitor student reaction to their communication patterns because students interpret and react differently to teacher verbal and nonverbal behaviors (Ford, 2005). Teachers should use classroom management techniques that support a safe and supportive learning environment (Weselby, 2014).

Informal assessments in this category include audio and/or video-taped lessons that teachers analyze for comments they made to students, administrator observations, observation and data of student behavior, and student surveys assessing the sense of the classroom community. In most districts, with parent and administrator permission, teachers can gather such data for purposes of their professional growth as long as the data are kept confidential. Teachers can monitor their number of positive to negative comments during a learning segment, setting a goal of three positive comments to every one negative comment for students with disabilities (Mellor, 2008). They can also analyze whether they call on all students equally, respond to student behavior in equitable ways, check for understanding by all students before advancing in their lesson, and implement behavior plans with fidelity. Some ways to differentiate study guides by affect follow:

Providing a rationale and motivation system for study guide completion. Some students benefit from additional reinforcement or support for assignment completion, such as a contract system, a reinforcement system, a self-monitoring system, or a goal sheet.

Modeling how to answer questions on the study guide. Students with LD and intellectual disabilities often need more explicit modeling and instruction regarding study guide completion than others. For example, Conderman et al. (2013) recommended the C-D-R-D-W-D strategy for teaching students with mild disabilities how to complete a study guide. These steps include Copy the question (unless not needed), Double-check that you copied the question correctly (unless not needed), Read the passage for the answer, Double-check the question and answer, Write the answer and page number, Double-check that you wrote the correct answer and page number. Gunning (2003) emphasized that the modeling component should include positive I statements, such as, “First I do this, then I do this, finally I do this.” Modeling through think-alouds provide an expert’s reading and thinking process and demystifies the comprehension process. As part of the think-aloud process, teachers should also explain when and where to use the strategy. Finally, teachers must provide sufficient time for guided practice with necessary supports such as cue cards, guiding questions, and additional practice (Gunning, 2003).

Involving parents by including the study guide as an entry in students’ planner and/or asking parents to initial the completed study guide.

Allowing students to quiz each other as a review method or choose group members, within reason.

Having students develop or use various interactive tools such as electronic flashcards to supplement the study guide. These often appeal to students with fine motor issues, those with shorter attention spans, and advanced learners who enjoy the challenge of developing their own questions and testing themselves over the content.

Analyzing classroom practices to ensure cultural sensitivity is emphasized by respecting student work preferences (i.e., cooperation-individualism); locus of control, gender relationships, communication styles; and ensuring that assessments and curriculum are free of bias and stereotypes (Ford, 2005).

Establishing a class goal for the number of completed and submitted study guides with a contingent reinforcer.

Differentiating Study Guides by Learning Environment

Allowing student choice in interacting with the classroom setting and materials is aligned with differentiating by environment. Teachers use responses from student or parent questionnaires and an analysis of the classroom space to assess practices in this category.

Certainly, conditions for optimal learning include physical elements. A flexible classroom layout is key, incorporating various types of furniture and arrangements to support both individual and group work (Weselby, 2014). Some ways to differentiate study guides by environment include the following:

Allow reasonable student choice regarding the location of study guide completion.

Use study carols or cardboard trifolds to reduce visual distractions. These structures are especially helpful for students with attention issues, yet they should be made available for anyone, and they should not be perceived as a punishment.

Ensure students with vision challenges have access to proper light and necessary technologies that access print. Some students with auditory or tactile hypersensitivity (Heward, 2013) benefit from use of headphones, computers, tape recorders, or teacher conferencing in lieu of writing study guides.

Respect students’ preference for various noise levels during study guide work time.

Allow students to use class zones typically reserved for other activities such as the art area or reading book nook.

Help students monitor their preference and needs for clothing attire based on classroom temperature.

Allow students extra breaks or movement, as needed.

Because students can complete study guides individually or in small groups, and because study guides may include embedded activities that require student use of classroom resources, the classroom environment needs to be sufficiently flexible to allow for student choice, noise, movement, and easy access to materials. Preteaching and thoroughly practicing routines and helping students monitor noise levels are prerequisites when differentiating learning environment (Boyle & Scanlon, 2010).

Concluding Thoughts

As classrooms become more diverse, differentiating instruction is key for helping all students access critical information, interact with the curriculum, and demonstrate their knowledge within a supportive and comfortable space. Teachers differentiate by using assessment data, such as results from student surveys, holding all students accountable for critical standards, and offering choices that honor student strengths and preferences. Study guides remain a popular instructional tool that teachers can differentiate based on content, process, affect, and environment. Teachers can begin differentiating a few questions or activities on the standard study guide, assess outcomes, and subsequently initiate additional aspects of differentiation as students are comfortable and as time allows. The time investing in differentiating is time well spent.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Anderson

L. W.

Krathwohl

D. R.

Airasian

P. W.

Cruikshank

K. A.

Mayer

R. E.

Pintrich

P. R.

. . . Wittrock

M. C.

(2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.

Boone

Higgins

(1992). Hypermedia applications for content-area study guides. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 8, 379–393.

Boyle

Scanlon

(2010). Methods and strategies for teaching students with mild disabilities. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Conderman

Bresnahan

(2010). Study guides to the rescue. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45, 169–176.

Conderman

Hedin

(2012). Purposeful assessment practices for co-teachers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(4), 19–27.

Conderman

Hedin

Bresnahan

(2013). Strategy instruction for middle and secondary students with mild disabilities: Creating independent learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Deshler

Ellis

Lenz

(1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities: Strategies and methods. Denver, CO: Love.

Fisher

Schumaker

Deshler

(1995). Searching for validated inclusive practices: A review of literature. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28, 1–20.

Ford

(2005). Welcoming all students to room 202: Creating culturally responsive classrooms. Gifted Child Today, 28(4), 28–30, 65.

10.

Friend

Bursuck

(2015). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers. Boston, MA: Pearson.

11.

Gargiulo

R. M.

Metcalf

(2010). Teaching in today’s inclusive classrooms: A universal design for learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

12.

Gore

M. C.

(2004). Successful inclusion strategies for secondary and middle school teachers: Keys to help struggling learners access the curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

13.

Gunning

T. G.

(2003). Building literacy in the content areas. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

14.

Heward

W. L.

(2013). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

15.

Hollingsead

Ostrander

Schilling

(2004). Study guides: Teacher tips: A review of literature with practical implications. Language Arts Journal of Michigan, 20(2), 13.

16.

Horton

S. V.

Boone

Lovitt

(1990). Teaching social studies to learning disabled high school students: Effects of a hypertext study guide. British Journal of Educational Technology, 21, 118–131.

17.

Horton

S. V.

Lovitt

T. C.

(1989). Using study guides with three classifications of secondary students. Journal of Special Education, 22, 447–462.

18.

Horton

S. V.

Lovitt

T. C.

Givens

Nelson

(1989). Teaching social studies to high school students with academic handicaps in a mainstreamed setting: Effects of a computerized study guide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 102–107.

19.

Kozen

A. A.

Murray

R. K.

Windell

(2006). Increasing all students’ chance to achieve: Using and adapting anticipation guides with middle school learners. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41, 195–200.

20.

Lenz

B. K.

Deshler

Kissam

(2004). Teaching content to all: Evidence-based inclusive practices in middle and secondary schools. Boston, MA: Pearson.

21.

Masters

L. F.

Mori

(1999). Teaching secondary students with mild learning and behavior problems. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

22.

Mellor

(2008). Attention seeking: A complete guide for teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

23.

Munk

(2003). Solving the grading puzzle for students with disabilities. Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.

24.

Ogle

D. M.

(1989). The know, want to know, learn strategy. In Muth

K. D.

(Ed.), Children’s comprehension of text: Research into practice (pp. 205–223). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

25.

Raphael

T. E.

(1986). Teaching question-answer relationships. Reading Teacher, 39, 516–520.

26.

Salyer

B. K.

Curran

Thyfault

(2002, March). What can I use tomorrow? Strategies for accessible math and science curriculum for diverse learners in rural schools. Paper presented at the American Council on Rural Special Education proceedings, Reno, NV.

27.

Schumm

J. S.

Vaughn

Leavell

A. G.

(1994). Planning pyramid: A framework for planning for diverse student needs during content area instruction. Reading Teacher, 47, 608–615.

28.

Skylar

Higgins

Boone

(2007). Strategies for adapting webquests for students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 20–28.

29.

Tomlinson

C. A.

Imbeau

(2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

30.

University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning. (2009). SIM strategic instruction model. Lawrence, KS: Author. Retrieved from http://kucrl.org/sim

31.

U.S. Department of Education. (2014). New accountability framework raises the bar for state special education programs. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/new-accountability-framework-raises-bar-state-special-education-programs

32.

Weselby

(2014). What is differentiated instruction? Examples of how to differentiate instruction in the classroom. Teaching Strategies. Retrieved from http://education.cu-portland.edu/category/blog/teaching-strategies/

33.

Wood

J. W.

(2006). Teaching students in inclusive settings: Adapting and accommodating instruction (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

34.

Wood

K. D.

(1995). Guiding middle school students through expository text. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 11, 137–147.

35.

Zimmerman

B. J.

(2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In Zimmerman

B. J.

Schunk

D. H.

(Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1–65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.