Improving math performance
Peer tutoring of a profoundly deaf girl, age 13, by a hearing tutor, age 12, in mathmatics
Prior to beginning tutoring, the hearing peer tutor was taught approximately 20 basic signs, as plus and minus, to facilitate communication with the deaf tutee. Each tutoring session lasted 20 minutes and occurred prior to the beginning of the school day. All sessions began with the tutor presenting ten written math problems on worksheets and giving directions to the tutee on how to take the test. These ten math problems were changed each day so that no single problem was tested more than once. The tutee was allowed 10 minutes to complete the test. The tutor was furnished with an answer sheet to determine the number of correct responses. The time remaining in the session was used by the tutor to provide instruction for incorrect answers. If time allowed, the tutor also worked with the tutee on the problems she had answered correctly or played a game with the tutee until each session ended. A sign language interpreter was in the room during each session in case the tutor and tutee were unable to communicate. With the exception of showing the tutor a few math signs, as divide, during the first few sessions, the interpreter did not participate in the tutoring sessions.
As a result of baseline testing, four objectives were identified for tutoring. When the tutee obtained a score of 70% correct or better for three consecutive days on an instructional objective, the next instructional objective was introduced the next day. This changing criterion design was followed for 19 days until all objectives were mastered. The results of this study indicate that a deaf child can be instructed successfully in mathematics by a hearing child using peer tutoring.
Burley, S., Gutkin, T., & Naumann, W. (1994). Assessing the efficacy of an academic hearing peer tutor for a profoundly deaf student. American Annals of the Deaf, 139, 4, 415-419.
Judith Powell, ETSU
Improving helping behavior and math achievement
20 general educators from grades two through four and their entire classes
This study investigated the effects of providing training and practice in helping behaviors to students during peer tutoring in mathematics. From each class, teachers identified oneaverage-achieving student and one student with a learning disability. The 20 classrooms were randomly assigned to two treatments. First, peer-tutoring experience with additional training in how to help . Second, peer-tutoring experience without training in how to help. The method of training included teacher examples, role plays by adults and students, and student practice with teacher feedback. The trained tutors and tutees used the techniques of offering and asking for help as taught to them in the helping behavior training. The training for the classwide peer tutoring included examples of appropriate behavior for the students to engage in while working with a partner. These included things like talk only to your partner and talk only about peer tutoring. The training also included instruction on how to give corrective feedback and offer specific positive reinforcement for correct answers. Also, how to practice using and interactive, mediated verbal rehearsal routine.
The trained and untrained tutors' performance was compared. Also, the trained and untrained tutees' performance was compared for the variables "offers help" and "asks for help". The students that received the helping training engaged in an increased number of directly trained helping behaviors than the untrained students. Students trained in basic peer-tutoring procedures can give their partners explanations of a more conceptual nature. The study showed that children working with a trained tutor had more improved math ability than students working with untrained tutors.
Fuchs, L. & Bentz, J. (1996). Improving peers' helping behavior to students with learning disabilities during mathematics peer tutoring. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 202-215.
Gina Sandidge, ETSU
improving math performance
Elementary grade students with moderate mental retardation
Students will be trained to make self-instruction statements during math problem solving activities. The statements pertain to general work habits (e.g., "Remember to work slowly and carefully" and "Keep your eyes on your paper") and task-specific behaviors (e.g., Which is the biggest number?" and "Write the biggest number and put marks next to it for the other number"). Training should be conducted on an individual basis, in ten-minute sessions, five days per week. The instructor should state the self-instruction statements and have the student repeat them. Then the student will make the self-instruction statements with prompting from the instructor. Finally, the prompts should be faded to the point at which the student can make the statements independently and consistently. The task-specific statements should be accompanied by the physical behaviors that the statement describes. These statements should also pertain to the order of the steps necessary to complete the problem (i.e., "First I..., then I..., etc.). The instructor should conduct daily practice trials after training is completed to make sure students are maintaining self-instruction skills. Appropriate reinforcement should be given for improved performance.
Percent of daily worksheet problems completed correctly.
Albion, F. M., & Salzberg, C. L. (1982). The effect of self-instructions on the rate of correct addition problems with mentally retarded children. Education and Treatment of Children, 5(2), 121-131.
Allison Rice and Nicole Fraye, UVA
Correctly solving math problems which involve finding missing addends
Eight to eleven year old students with learning disabilities
The student was taught a self-instruction procedure by the teacher during two training sessions lasting approximately 30 minutes. First, the teacher modeled the use of self-instruction. The modeled instructions were as follows: First, I have to point to the problem. Second, I have to read the problem. Third I have to circle the sign. So far I'm OK! Above the smaller number I put that many sticks. Above the square I put some more sticks so that the number of sticks altogether equals the larger number. I count the number of sticks above the square. This is the answer. I write the number in the square. I read (again) the problem statement. I tell myself,"Nice work!" A tape recorder was turned on during the demonstration of the self-instruction steps; then the teacher, aided by the taped instructions, solved the remaining problems on the training sheet. The teacher, in collaboration with the student, wrote the self-instruction cues together in the student's own words. The student then read the instructions into the tape recorder. The written instructions were removed and the student was asked to solve the problems on a training worksheet with the aid of the taped instructions listened to through earphones. The student was praised for correct use of the self instruction procedure and the teacher provided modeling, and rehearsal following incorrect responses. This process was repeated until the student correctly and independently applied the self-instruction procedure to one arithmetic problem. During the second training session, the teacher briefly demonstrated two problems using the taped instructions. The student was asked to solve 20 problems on a worksheet, using the taped instructions and earphones. Again the student was praised for correct use of the self-instruction procedure. Feedback, modeling, and rehearsal followed any incorrect responses. Within a short period of time the student can be expected to use the self-instruction procedure without needing the taped cues.
Record the percentage of problems completed correctly.
Wood, D.A., Rosenberg, M.S., & Carran, D.T. (1993). The effects of tape-recorded self-instruction cues on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(4), 250-258,269.
Improving students' mathematics performance on homework assignments
Middle school students (grades 6-8) with learning disabilities or emotional disturbance
Students were assigned to heterogeneous cooperative homework teams (CHT) of three or four members. At the end of each day's math lesson (except Fridays), an instructionally relevant homework assignment was given to the homework teams. Each assignment consisted of eight computation and two story problems. Each member of the team was to complete the homework independently. The next day of class, CHT groups met for about ten minutes. Students gave their assignments to the team's checker whose job it was to grade the homework for that day. The responsibility of being a checker rotated to a different team member each day. On the day they were checkers, students were responsible for:grading teammates' homework quickly using a teacher-made answer sheet, reporting the grades to the teacher,and returning the papers to the team members for review and corrections. With individual papers in hand, team members were encouraged to help each other understand and correct mistakes. Corrected papers were then collected and turned into the teacher by the checker. At the end of the week, team scores were determined by averaging each member's daily score and using these to calculate a team mean. Awards in the form of certificates were presented to teams who met predetermined criteria.
Record the percentage correct on each individual's daily assignment, and record the weekly team mean.
O'Melia, M.C., & Rosenberg, M.S. (1994). Effects of cooperative homework teams on the acquisition of mathematics skills by secondary students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 60(6), 538-548.
Linda Glover, UVA