Advertisement

Using a Virtual Manipulative Intervention Package to Support Maintenance in Teaching Subtraction with Regrouping to Students with Developmental Disabilities

  • Jiyoon ParkEmail author
  • Emily C. Bouck
  • John P. SmithIII
Original Paper
  • 80 Downloads

Abstract

To live independently, it is critical that students with disabilities maintain the basic mathematical skills they have acquired so they may apply these skills in daily life. To support maintenance of mathematical skills among students with developmental disabilities, the researchers used a multiple probe across participants design to examine the effectiveness of the VRA instructional sequence with fading support in teaching subtraction with regrouping to four students with developmental disabilities. A functional relation was found between the VRA instructional sequence with fading support and students’ accuracy in solving the problems. Students also maintained the skill up to 6 weeks after the intervention.

Keywords

Mathematics Virtual manipulatives Developmental disabilities Maintenance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was one of three stand-alone studies included in JP’s doctoral dissertation. This study was supported by a doctoral dissertation fellowship from Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education at Michigan State University. The authors would like to thank the teachers and students who participated in this research.

Author Contributions

JP conceived of and designed the study, conducted research sessions, collected data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and drafted the manuscript. ECB contributed to the study’s design, helped draft the manuscript, and edited the manuscript. JPS contributed to and edited the manuscript. All authors read, edited, and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent and assent were obtained from all individual participants included in the study after the Institutional Review Board approved of the study.

References

  1. Agrawal, J., & Morin, L. L. (2016). Evidence-based practices: Applications of concrete representational abstract framework across math concepts for students with disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 31, 34–44.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberto, P., & Troutman, A. (2009). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  3. Bouck, E. C., Bassette, L., Shurr, J., Park, J., Kerr, J., & Whorley, A. (2017a). Teaching equivalent fractions to secondary students with disabilities via the virtual–representational–abstract instructional sequence. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32, 220–231.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417727291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouck, E. C., Chamberlain, C., & Park, J. (2017b). Concrete and app-based manipulatives to support students with disabilities with subtraction. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 52, 317–331.Google Scholar
  5. Bouck, E. C., Park, J., & Nickell, B. (2017c). Using the concrete–representational–abstract approach to support students with intellectual disability to solve change-making problems. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 60, 24–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bouck, E. C., Park, J., Satsangi, R., Cwiakala, K., & Levy, K. (2019). Using the virtual–abstract instructional sequence to support acquisition of algebra. Journal of Special Education Technology.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419833022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouck, E. C., Park, J., Shurr, J., Bassette, L., & Whorley, A. (2018a). Using the virtual–representational–abstract approach to support students with intellectual disability in mathematics. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33, 237–248.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357618755696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouck, E. C., Park, J., Sprick, J., Shurr, J., Bassette, L., & Whorley, A. (2017d). Using the virtual-abstract instructional sequence to teach addition of fractions. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 70, 163–174.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.09.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bouck, E. C., Satsangi, R., Doughty, T. T., & Courtney, W. T. (2013). Virtual and concrete manipulatives: A comparison of approaches for solving mathematics problems for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1863-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouck, E. C., Satsangi, R., & Park, J. (2018b). The concrete–representational–abstract approach for students with learning disabilities: An evidence-based practice synthesis. Remedial and Special Education, 39, 211–228.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517721712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bouck, E. C., Shurr, J., Bassette, L., Park, J., & Whorley, A. (2018c). Adding it up: Comparing concrete and app-abased manipulatives to support students with disabilities with adding fractions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33, 237–248.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418759341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bouck, E. C., Shurr, J., Tom, K., Jasper, A. D., Bassette, L., Miller, B., et al. (2012). Fix it with TAPE: Repurposing technology to be assistive technology for students with high incidence disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 56, 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bouck, E. C., & Sprick, J. (2019). The virtual–representational–abstract framework to support students with disabilities in mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54, 173–180.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451218767911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brainingcamp. (2018). Base ten blocks manipulative. Retrieved from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/base-ten-blocks-manipulative/id966324173.
  15. Burton, C. E., Anderson, D. H., Prater, M. A., & Dyches, T. T. (2013). Video self-modeling on an iPad to teach functional math skills to adolescents with autism and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 28, 67–77.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357613478829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cass, M., Cates, D., Smith, M., & Jackson, C. (2003). Effects of manipulative instruction on solving area and perimeter problems by students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practices, 18, 112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cihak, D. F., & Grim, J. (2008). Teaching students with autism spectrum disorder and moderate intellectual disabilities to use counting-on strategies to enhance independent purchasing skills. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2, 716–727.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2008.02.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Collins, B. C. (2012). Systematic instruction for students with moderate and severe disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Connolly, A. J. (2007). KeyMath-3 diagnostic assessment. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  20. DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPattern & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language instruction (pp. 125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Doabler, C. T., & Fien, H. (2013). Explicit mathematics instruction: What teachers can do for teaching students with mathematics difficulties. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48, 276–285.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451212473151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Flores, M. M., Hinton, V. M., Strozier, S. D., & Terry, S. L. (2014). Using the concrete–representational–abstract sequence and the strategic instruction model to teach computation to students with autism spectrum disorders and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49, 547–554.Google Scholar
  23. Foegen, A. (2008). Algebra progress monitoring and interventions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 66–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 9–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gast, D. L., & Ledford, J. R. (2014). Single case research methodology. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jimenez, B. A., Courtade, G. R., & Browder, D. M. (2008). Teaching an algebra equation to high school students with moderate developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43, 266–274.Google Scholar
  27. Latterell, C. M. (2005). Math wars: A guide for parents and teachers. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  28. Mancl, D. B., Miller, S. P., & Kennedy, M. (2012). Using the concrete–representational–abstract sequence with integrated strategy instruction to teach subtraction with regrouping to students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 152–166.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00363.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 153–191.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morton, R. C., & Flynt, S. W. (1997). A comparison of constant time delay and prompt fading to teach multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 24, 3–13.Google Scholar
  31. Nelson, G., & Powell, S. R. (2018). A systematic review of longitudinal studies of mathematics difficulty. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51, 523–539.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221917714773.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Paine, S. C., Camine, D. W., White, W. A., & Walters, G. (1982). Effects of fading teacher presentation structure (covertization) on acquisition and maintenance or arithmetic problem-solving skills. Education and Treatment of Children, 5, 93–107.Google Scholar
  33. Park, S., & Mcleod, K. (2018). Multimedia open educational resources in mathematics for high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 37, 131–153.Google Scholar
  34. Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Brown, L. (2009). An improved effect size for single case research: Nonoverlap of All Pairs (NAP). Behavior Therapy, 40, 357–367.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2008.10.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Sauber, S. B. (2011a). Combining non-overlap and trend for single case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42, 284–299.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Sauber, S. B. (2011b). Combining non-overlap and trend for single case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42, 284–299.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Peltier, C., Morin, K. L., Bouck, E. C., Lingo, M. E., Pulos, J. M., Scheffler, F. A., … Deardorff, M. E. (2019). A meta-analysis of single-case research using mathematics manipulatives with students at risk or identified with a disability. The Journal of Special Education.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466919844516.
  38. Powell, S. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Reaching the mountaintop: Addressing the common core standards in mathematics for students with mathematics difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28, 38–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rock, M. L., & Thead, B. K. (2007). The effects of fading a strategic self-monitoring intervention on students’ academic engagement, accuracy, and productivity. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16, 389–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Root, J. R., Browder, D. M., Saunders, A. F., & Yo, Y. (2017). Schema-based instruction with concrete and virtual manipulatives to teach problem solving to students with autism. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 42–52.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516643592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Satsangi, R., & Bouck, E. C. (2015). Using virtual manipulative instruction to teach the concepts of area and perimeter to secondary students with learning disabilities, 38, 174–186.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714550101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Satsangi, R., & Miller, B. (2017). The case for adopting virtual manipulatives in mathematics education for students with disabilities. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and youth, 61, 303–310.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1275505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Saunders, A. F., Spooner, F., & Davis, L. L. (2018). Using video prompting to teach mathematical problem solving of real-world video-simulation problems. Remedial and Special Education, 39, 53–64.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517717042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shurr, J., Jimenez, B., & Bouck, E. C. (2019). Maintenance. In J. Shurr, B. Jimenez, & E. C. Bouck (Eds.), Research-based practices and instructional information for students with autism and intellectual disability. Council for Exceptional Children: Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
  45. Siegler, R. S. (1987). The perils of averaging data over strategies: An example from children’s addition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 250–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Snell, M. E., & Brown, F. (2011). Instruction of students with severe disabilities (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  47. Spooner, F., Knight, V. F., Browder, D. M., & Smith, B. R. (2012). Evidence-based practice for teaching academics to students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 374–387.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932511421634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spooner, F., Root, J. R., Saunders, A. F., & Browder, D. M. (2018). An updated evidence-based practice review on teaching mathematics to students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517751055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Spooner, F., Saunders, A. F., Root, J. R., & Brosh, C. (2017). Promoting access to common core mathematics for students with severe disabilities through mathematical problem solving. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(3), 171–186.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796917697119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stroizer, S., Hinton, V., Flores, M., & Terry, L. (2015). An investigation of the effects of CRA instruction and students with autism spectrum disorder. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50, 223–236.Google Scholar
  51. Tzanakaki, P., Hastings, R. P., Grindle, C. F., Hughes, C., & Hoare, Z. (2014). An individualized numeracy curriculum for children with intellectual disabilities: A single blind pilot randomized controlled trial. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 26, 615–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Advancing educational technology in teacher preparation: Policy brief. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2016/12/Ed-Tech-in-Teacher-Preparation-Brief.pdf.
  53. White, O. R., & Haring, N. G. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
  54. Yakubova, G., Hughes, E. M., & Shinaberry, M. (2016). Learning with technology: Video modeling with concrete–representational–abstract sequencing for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47, 2349–2362.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2768-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiyoon Park
    • 1
    Email author
  • Emily C. Bouck
    • 1
  • John P. SmithIII
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special EducationMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations