The Effects of Strategic Notetaking on the Recall and Comprehension of
Lecture Information for High School Students with Learning Disabilities
Joseph R. Boyle: Virginia Commonwealth University
Mary Weishaar: Southern Illinois University–Edwardsville
Abstract:
This investigation examined the effects of strategic notetaking on the
recall and comprehension of high school students with learning disabilities
(LD) or educable mental retardation (EMR). Twenty-six students with high
incidence disabilities (LD or EMR) were randomly assigned by grade and
disability to either an experimental or control group. Using strategic
notetaking, students in the experimental group were taught to independently
take notes while viewing a videotaped lecture. Students who were taught
strategic notetaking scored significantly higher on measures of immediate
free recall, long-term free recall, comprehension, and number of notes
recorded than students in the control group who used conventional notetaking.
The limitations of the research and implications of this technique for
classroom application are discussed.
Curriculum-Based Measurement in the Content Areas: Validity of Vocabulary-Matching
as an Indicator of Performance in Social Studies
Christine A. Espin: University of Minnesota Todd W. Busch: University
of Minnesota Jongho Shin: University of Minnesota Ron Kruschwitz: North
St. Paul, Oakdale, Maplewood School District
Abstract:
In this study, we examined the reliability and validity of two curriculum-based
measures as indicators of performance in a content-area classroom. Participants
were 58 students in a 7th-grade social studies class. CBM measures were
student- and administrator-read vocabulary-matching probes. Criterion
measures were knowledge pre- and post-tests, the social studies subtest
of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, and student grades. Results revealed
moderate alternate-form reliability for both vocabulary-matching measures.
Reliability of the measures was increased by combining scores across two
testing sessions. Correlations between the predictor and criterion variables
were moderate to moderately strong, with the exception of those between
vocabulary-matching and student grades. Observed scores for students with
LD were lower than for students without LD on both student- and administrator-read
vocabulary-matching measures. Few differences in reliability and validity
coefficients were found between the student- and administrator-read measures.
Results are discussed in terms of the use of CBM as a system for monitoring
performance and designing interventions for students with learning disabilities
in content-area classrooms.
The Double-Deficit Theory of Reading Disability Does Not Fit All
Peggy T. Ackerman: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Carol A.
Holloway: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Patricia L. Youngdahl:
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Roscoe A. Dykman: Arkansas
Children’s Hospital
Abstract:
The double-deficit theory of reading disability (Wolf & Bowers, 1999)
was examined in a sample of 56 reading-disabled and 45 normal-reading
elementary school children (aged 8 to 11). As hypothesized, the two groups
differed markedly on all phonological analysis tasks and on rapid continuous
naming of digits and letters (the double deficits), but they differed
as well on orthographic tasks, attention ratings, arithmetic achievement,
and all WISC-III factors except perceptual organization. Within the reading-disabled
(RD) sample, children in the double-deficit subgroup were no more impaired
in reading and spelling than those with a single deficit in phonological
analysis, and those with a single deficit in rapid naming were no more
impaired than those with neither deficit. Multiple regression analyses
suggest that a multiple causality theory of RD is more plausible than
a double-deficit theory.
Teaching Middle School Students with Learning Disabilities to Recruit
Peer Assistance During Cooperative Learning Group Activities
Patricia L. Wolford: Ohio State University William L. Heward: Ohio State
University Sheila R. Alber: University of Southern Mississippi
Abstract:
Four 8th graders with learning disabilities were taught to recruit assistance
from peers during cooperative learning activities in two general education
classrooms. The students were taught to show their work to a peer and
make statements such as: “Can you help me?” or “How
am I doing so far?” Training was conducted in the special education
classroom and consisted of modeling, role playing, corrective feedback,
and praise. A multiple baseline across students design showed that recruitment
training increased (1) the rate of recruiting responses by the students,
(2) the rate at which the students received instructional feedback and
praise from peers, and (3) the productivity and accuracy with which the
students completed their language arts assignments.
Helping Teachers Formulate Sound Test Accommodation Decisions for Students
with Learning Disabilities
Lynn S. Fuchs: Peabody College of Vanderbilt University Douglas Fuchs:
Peabody College of Vanderbilt University
Abstract:
This paper introduces a data-based approach as an alternative way to help
teachers formulate decisions about the validity of test accommodations
for students with LD. Three rationales for the approach are provided:
(a) an inadequate research base to guide decision-making; (b)
the heterogeneity of the LD population; and (c) problems with
teachers’ use of subjective judgment.
Well-controlled studies on test accommodations are too scarce to draw firm conclusions about effects for the group of students labeled learning disabled (LD). Moreover, in light of the heterogeneity of learning disabilities, the individual, rather than the LD label, may be the more appropriate unit for deciding which test accommodations preserve the validity of test scores for students with LD. In this paper, we provide a rationale for a data-based approach to help teachers formulate decisions about the validity of test accommodations for individual students with LD. Then we describe an objective assessment process teachers may use in determining valid test accommodations. We conclude with recommendations for practitioners.