Middle-School Mathematics Curricula and Students with Learning Disabilities: Is One Curriculum Better?

Abstract

Little is known about how best to teach mathematics to students with learning disabilities. This study explored the performance and self-reported calculator use of 13 sixth-grade and 15 seventh-grade students with learning disabilities educated in either standards-based or traditional mathematics curricula on multiple-choice and open-ended assessments. Across both groups of students: (a) curriculum did not impact the number of problems students answered correctly, (b) students answered more problems correctly on the multiple-choice than on the open-ended assessments, (c) students self-reported low percentages of calculator use, and (d) curriculum did not impact students' self-reported calculator use. Overall, the results suggest that students with learning disabilities are not advantaged or disadvantaged by receiving either a traditional or a standards-based mathematics curriculum.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Algozzine

O'Shea

D. J.

Crews

W. B.

Stoddard

(1987). Analysis of mathematics competence of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Special Education, 21, 97–107.

Baxter

J. A.

Woodward

Olson

(2001). Effects of reform based mathematics instruction on low achievers in five third-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 529–547.

Bridgeman

Harvey

Braswell

(1995). Effects of calculator use on scores on a test of mathematical reasoning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 323–340.

Bouck

E. C.

Bouck

M. K.

(2008). Does it add up? Calculator use by middle school students with and without disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 23(2), 17–32.

Burrill

Allison

Breaux

Kastberg

Leatham

Sanchez

(2002). Handheld graphing technology at the secondary level: Research findings and implications for classroom practice. Dallas, TX: Texas Instruments.

Calhoon

M. B.

Emerson

R. W.

Flores

Houchins

D. E.

(2007). Computational fluency performance profile of high school students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 292–303.

Carroll

W. M.

(1998). Geometric knowledge of middle school students in a reform-based mathematics curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 97, 188–197.

Cawley

J. F.

(2002). Mathematics interventions and students with high incidence disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 2–6.

Cawley

J. F.

Miller

J. H.

(1989). Cross-sectional comparisons of the mathematical performance of children with learning disabilities: Are we on the right track towards comprehensive programming? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 250–259.

10.

Cawley

Parmar

Foley

T. E.

Salmon

Roy

(2001). Arithmetic performance of students: Implications for standards and programming. Exceptional Children, 67, 311–328.

11.

Cawley

J. F.

Parmar

R. S.

Yan

W. E.

Miller

J. H.

(1998). Arithmetic computation performance of students with learning disabilities: Implications for curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 68–74.

12.

Chapin

S. H.

Illingworth

Landau

M. S.

Masingila

J. O.

McCracken

(2000). Prentice Hall Middle Grades Math: Tools for Success. Boston: Prentice Hall.

13.

Charles

R. I.

Illingworth

McNemar

Mills

Ramirez

Reeves

(2008). Prentice Hall Mathematics. Boston: Prentice Hall.

14.

Cobb

Wood

Yackel

Nicholls

Wheatley

Trigatti

Perlwitz

(1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 3–29.

15.

DeSimone

J. R.

Parmar

R. S.

(2006). Issues and challenges for middle school mathematics teachers in inclusion classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 338–348.

16.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

(2005). Enhancing mathematical problem solving for students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 45–57.

17.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Compton

D. L.

Bryant

J. D.

Hamlett

C. L.

Seethaler

P. M.

(2007). Mathematics screening with progress monitoring at first grade: Implications for responsiveness to intervention. Exceptional Children, 73, 311–330.

18.

Gagnon

J. C.

Maccini

(2007). Teacher-reported use of empirically-validated and standards-based practices in secondary mathematics. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 43–56.

19.

Goos

Galbraith

Renshaw

Geiger

(2003). Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms. Mathematical Behavior, 22, 73–89.

20.

Hudson

Miller

S. P.

Butler

(2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 19–32.

21.

Huntley

M. A.

Rasmussen

C. L.

Villarubi

R. S.

Sangton

Fey

J. T.

(2000). Effects of standards-based mathematics education: A study of the Core-plus Mathematics Project algebra and functions strand. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 328–361.

22.

Jitendra

DiPipi

C. M.

Perron-Jones

(2002). An exploratory study of schema-based word-problem-solving instruction for middle school students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 23–38.

23.

Johnstone

C. J.

Altman

Thurlow

M. L.

Thompson

S. J.

(2006). A summary of research on the effects of test accommodations: 2002 through 2004 (Technical Report 45). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved January 23, 2009, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Tech45/.

24.

Lappan

Fey

Fitzgerald

Friel

Phillips

(2004). Connected Mathematics Project. Boston: Prentice Hall.

25.

Liu

Raudenbush

(2004). A note on the noncentrally parameter and effect size estimates for the F test in ANOVA. Journal of Educationaland Behavioral Statistics, 29, 251–255.

26.

Loveless

(2004, April). Computation skills, calculators, and achievement gaps: An analysis of NAEP items. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.brookings.org/views/papers/20040415loveless.htm.

27.

Maccini

Gagnon

J. C.

(2000). Best practices for teaching mathematics to secondary students with special needs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32, 1–22.

28.

Maccini

Gagnon

J. C.

(2002). Perceptions and applications of NCTM standards by special and general education teachers. Exceptional Children, 68, 235–244.

29.

Maccini

Gagnon

J. C.

(2005). Mathematics and technology-based interventions. In Edyburn

Higgins

Boone

(Eds.), Handbook of special education research and practice (pp. 599–622). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.

30.

Maccini

McNaughton

Ruhl

K. L.

(1999). Algebra instruction for student with learning disabilities: Implications from a research review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22(2), 113–126.

31.

Maccini

Ruhl

K. L.

(2000). Effects of a graduated instructional sequences on the algebraic subtraction of integers by secondary students with learning disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 465–489.

32.

Michigan Department of Education. (2002). Revised administrative rules for special education. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://homepages.wmich.edu/∼haus/427/SPED_ADMIN_RULES.pdf

33.

Michigan Department of Education. (2009). Michigan administrative rules for special education supplemented with IDEA federal regulations. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/MARSE-April09_274156_7.pdf

34.

Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Michigan education assessment program (MEAP). Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-140-22709_31168-,00.html

35.

Michigan State University. (2006). Connected mathematics project. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from http://connectedmath.msu.edu/

36.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

37.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and NCTM standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

38.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2005). Computation, calculators, and common sense: A position of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/About_NCTM/Position_Statements/computation.pdf

39.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

40.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).

41.

Parmar

R. S.

Cawley

J. F.

Frazita

R. R.

(1996). Word problem-solving by students with and without mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62, 415–429.

42.

Pomerantz

(1997). The role of calculators in math education research. Educalc.net. Retrieved September 25, 2006, from http://www.educalc.net/135569.page.

43.

Reys

R. E.

(2001). Curricular controversy in the math wars: A battle without winners. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 255–258.

44.

Reys

Lapan

Holliday

Wasman

(2003). Assessing the impact of standards-based middle grades mathematics curriculum materials on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 74–83.

45.

Riordan

J. E.

Noyce

P. E.

(2001). The impact of two standards-based mathematics currícula on student achievement in Massachusetts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 368–398.

46.

Rivera

D. P.

(1997). Mathematics education and students with learning disabilities: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 68, 2–19.

47.

Salend

S. J.

Hofstetter

(1996). Adapting a problem-solving approach to teaching mathematics to students with mild disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31, 209–217.

48.

Schmidt

Houang

Cogan

(2002, Summer). A coherent curriculum: The case of mathematics. American Educator, 1–17.

49.

Schoen

H. L.

Fey

J. T.

Hirsch

C. R.

Coxford

A. F.

(1999). Issues and options in the math wars. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 444–453.

50.

U.S. Department of Education. (2005). 27th Annual report to congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2005 Vol. 1. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2005/parts-b-c/27th-vol-1.pdf.

51.

Wagner

(1995). Outcomes for youth with serious emotional disturbance in secondary school and early adulthood. Future of Children, 5(2), 90–113.

52.

Wood

Sellers

(1997). Deepening the analysis: A longitudinal assessment of problem-centered mathematics projects. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 163–186.

53.

Woodward

(1999). Redoing the numbers: Secondary math for a postsecondary work world. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(4), 74–79.

54.

Woodward

(2004). Mathematics reform in the US: Past to present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 16–31.

55.

Woodward

Baxter

(1997). The effects of an innovative approach to mathematics on academically low-achieving students in inclusive settings. Exceptional Children, 63, 373–388.

56.

Woodward

Brown

(2006). Meeting the curricular needs of academically low-achieving students in middle grade mathematics. The Journal of Special Education, 3, 151–159.

57.

Xin

Y. P.

Jitendra

A. K.

Deatline-Buchman

(2005). Effects of mathematical word problem-solving instruction on middle school students with learning problems. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 181–192.

58.

Ysseldyke

Thurlow

Seyfarth

Bielinski

Moody

Haigh

(1999). Instructional and assessment accommodations in Maryland (Maryland/Kentucky Report 6). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved August 29, 2007, from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MdKy6.htm.