Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Computer-Mediated Intersensory Learning Model for Students with Learning Disabilities

  • Published:
TechTrends Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article proposes a computer-mediated intersensory learning model as an alternative to traditional instructional approaches for students with learning disabilities (LDs) in the inclusive classroom. Predominant practices of classroom inclusion today reflect the six principles of zero reject, nondiscriminatory evaluation, appropriate education, least restrictive environment, procedural due process, and parental and student participation. These practices guide the amended Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004. For nearly 35 years the act has championed for the rights of children with disabilities. The act mandates that students with LDs are educated in the general education classroom (Hock, Deshler, & Schumaker, 1999).

Those with LDs are expected to reach a mastery level of the subject matter in the inclusive classroom (Kameenui & Carnine, 1998). Among other things, society now expects all learners of the digital generation to be able to manipulate and process information, and to learn to apply it in their daily lives (Gilbert & Driscoll, 2002). These high expectations place increased demands on students with LDs leading to a need for instructional alternatives to help them succeed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, D. J. (1990). Neuropsychological treatment of dyslexia. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K., & Eliassen, J. C. (1998). Time course of activating brain areas in generating verbal associations. Psychological Science, 8, 56–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banich, M. T., & Nicholas, C. D. (1998). Integration of processing between the hemispheres in word recognition. In M. Beeman, & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (51–77). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, E., & Roe, K. (2001). Language development in children with unilateral brain injury. In C. A. Nelson, & M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 281–308). Boston: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beeman, M. (1998). Coarse semantic coding and discourse comprehension. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 255–284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beeman, M. J., & Chiarello, C. (1998). Complementary right and left hemisphere language comprehension: How do the cerebral hemispheres contribute to encoding spatial relations? Retrieved from http://www.blackwellsynergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8721.ep11521805

  • Beeman, M. J. & Bowden, E. (2000). The right hemisphere maintains solution-related activation for yet-to-be solved insight problems. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1231–1241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birch, H. G., & Belmont, L. (1964). Auditoryvisual integration in normal and retarded readers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 34, 852–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, H. G., & Lefford, A. (1963). Intersensory development in children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 28(5), 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boone, R. T., Burke, M. D., & Fore, C. (2006). The impact of cognitive organizers and technology-based practices on student success in secondary social studies classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(1), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (1998). Modeling cerebral asymmetries in high-dimensional space. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 215–244). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catts, H. W. (1993). The relationship between speech-language impairments and reading disabilities. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 948–958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Research on Learning. (2007). Learning strategies. Retrieved from http://www.kucrl.org/sim/strategies.shtml

  • Chiarello, C. (1998). On codes of meaning and the meaning of codes: Semantic access and retrieval within and between hemispheres. In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 141–160). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciavarelli, A. (2003). Assessing the quality of online instruction: Integrating instructional quality and web usability assessments (Report No. CG032657). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED480084)

  • Computer Products for Education. (1997). Sunburst Building Perspective Deluxe [educational software]. Retrieved from http://www.educational-software.com/home.html

  • Davies, J. E. (1997). EDPY485 Technology in Education: Mindtools. Retrieved from http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/edpy485/edtech/mindtool.htm

  • Dehaene, S., Molko, N., Cohen, L., & Wilson, J. A. (2004). Arithmetic and brain. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14, 218–224. Retrieved from http://www.unicog.org/publications/Dehaene_ReviewNumber_CurrOp-Neurobiol2004.pdf

  • Deshler, D. D. (2005). Adolescents with learning disabilities: Unique challenges and reasons for hope. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 122–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Lenz, B. K., Bulgren, J. A., Hock, M. F., Knight, J., & Ehren, B. J. (2001). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16 (2), 96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donders, J., & van der Vlugt H. (1984). Eyemovement patterns in disabled readers at two age levels: A test of Bakker’s balance model. Journal of Clinical Neuro-psychology, 6(3), 241–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryer, R., & Lambert, A. J. (1999). The balance model of dyslexia and remedial training: An evaluative study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(2), 174–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisert, P. G., & Furell M. K. (1995). Teachers, computers, and curriculum. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freund, L. (2005). Teachings students with learning problems in the inclusive classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galaburda, A. M., & Livingstone, M. (1993). Evidence for a magnocellular defect in developmental dyslexia. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 682, 70–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligence. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. N., & Driscoll, P. M. (2002). Collaborative knowledge building: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(1), 59–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glazer, S. M., & Cury, D. (1998). Word processing programs: Survival tools for children with writing problems. Reading, Writing and Learning Disabilities, 4, 187–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glickstein, M. (2000). How are visual areas of the brain connected to motor areas for the sensory guidance of movement? Trends Neuroscience, 23(12), 613–617. Retrieved from http://www.ini.uzh.ch/∼peterk/Lectures/LecturePapers/Glickstein.tins.00.pdf

  • Hasselbring, T. S., & Williams G. (2000). Use of computers technology to help students with special needs. Children and Computer Technology, 10, 102–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, K., Boone, R., & Lovitt, T. C. (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 402–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, M. F., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (1999). Tutoring for academically underprepared college students: A review of the literature. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 29 (2), 101–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, P., Lignugaris-Kraft, B., & Miller, T. (1993). Using content enhancements to improve the performance of adolescents with learning disabilities in content classes. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8, 106–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. F., High, L., & Otaiba, S. A. (2007). Dyslexia and the brain: What does current research tell us? Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org/article/14907

  • Hunt, N., & Marshall, K. (2004). Exceptional children and youth (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivry, R., & Lebby, P. C. (1998). The neurology of consonant perception: Specialized module or distributed processors? In M. Beeman & C. Chiarello (Eds.), Right hemisphere language comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 3–26). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mind tools for schools: Engaging critical thinking. New York: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kameenui, E. J., & Carnine, D. W. (Eds.). (1998). Effective strategies for accommodating students with diverse learning and curricular needs. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1995). The nature of learning disabilities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koivisto, M., & Laine, M. (2000). Hemispheric asymmetries in activation and integration of categorical information. Laterality, 5, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, C. L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1986). Effectiveness of computer-based education in colleges. AEDS Journal, 19(2/3), 81–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A. (1983). Synthesis of research on computer based instruction. Educational Leadership, 41(1), 19–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A., Banger, R. L., & Williams, G. W. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 19–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1987). Review of recent research literature on computer-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12(3), 222–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, A., Naikar, N., McLahan, K., & Aitken, V. (1999). A new component of visual orienting: Implicit effects of peripheral information and subthreshold cues on covert attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 321–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, P. E., Schumaker, J. B., & Desher, D. D. (2007). The development and validation of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a self-advocacy strategy to students with disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 277–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, M. S. (1999). Reading and attention disorders. In D. D. Duane (Ed.), The magnocellular/parietal system and visual symptoms in dyslexia (pp. 81–92). Baltimore: York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock, R. H., & Carlson, D. M. (2000). Planning for effective, enjoyable computer lab use. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32, 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockard, J., & Abrams, P. (2003). Computers for twenty-first century educators. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macaluso, E. (2006). Multisensory processing in sensory-specific cortical areas. The Neuroscientist, 2(4), 327–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maccini, P., Gagnon, J. C., & Hughes C. A. (2002). Technology-based practices for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(4).

  • Margalit, M. (1990). Effective technology integration for disabled children: The family perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, D., Pracek, E., & Olson, J. (2000). Technology for teaching and learning. In J. L. Olson, & M. M. Platt (Eds.), Teaching children and adolescents with special needs (3rd ed., pp. 322–346). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellard, D., Barth, A., & Deshler, D. (2004). LD identification: It’s not simply a matter of building a better mousetrap. Learning Disability Quarterly, 27(4), 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyen, E., Pogio, J., Seok, S., & Smith, S. (2006). Equity for students with high incidence disabilities in statewide assessment. Focus on exceptional children 38(7).

  • Mindnautilus.com Corporation. (1999). textHELP Read & Write Gold. Retrieved from http://www.readwritegold.com/

  • Molfese, D. (1980). Hemispheric specialization for temporal information: Implications for the perception of voicing during speech perception. Brain and Language, 11, 285–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, D. J., & Marks, L. J. (2006). Building student independence in writing with technology. Preventing School Failure, 50(3), 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. (2002). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofiesh, N. S. (2004). Technology and students with learning and behavioral disabilities. Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities, 17, 265–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, J. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayman, J., & Zaidel, E. (1991). Rhyming and the right hemisphere. Brain and Language, 40, 89–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, E. B. (2008). Learners with mild disabilities: A characteristics approach. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. H., Hitchcock, C., & Meyer, A. (2005). The universally designed classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. H., & Strangman, N. (2007). Universal design for learning: Meeting the challenge of individual learning differences through a neurocognitive perspective. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(4), 381–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, E. D. (1981). The aprosodias: Functional anatomic organization of the components of language in the right hemisphere. Archives of Neurology, 38, 561–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholastic Inc. (2006). Wiggleworks. Retrieved from http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/wiggleworks/index.htm

  • Sec 508 of the American Rehabilitation Act. (2006). Section 508 standards. Retrieved from http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=12#Web

  • Senf, G. M. (1969). Development of immediate memory for bisensory stimuli in normal children and children with learning disorders. Developmental Psychology, 1, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senf, G. M., & Feshbach, L. (1970). Development of bisensory memory in culturally deprived, diplexic and normal readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(6), 416–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seok, S. (2008). Maximizing web accessibility through user-centered Interface design. In D. C. Calero, M. A. Moraga, & M. Piattini (Eds.), Handbook of research on we information systems quality. New York: Idea Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T., Polloway, E. A., Patton J, R., & Dowdy, C. A. (2004). Teaching students with special needs in inclusive settings (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperry, R. W., Gazzaniga, M., S., & Bogen, J., E. (1969). Interhemispheric relations: The neocortical commissures; syndromes of hemispheric disconnection. In P.J. Vnken & G. Bruyn (Eds.), Handbook of Clinical Neurology, (Vol. 4). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. A., & Reid, D. K. (1994). Social and individual forces in learning: Implications for instruction of children with learning difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17(1), 72–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. L., & Deshler, D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: Converting a meta-analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 124–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Boston: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wager, W., & Gagne, R. M. (1988). Designing computer-aided instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 35–60). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30 (1), 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Wide Web Consortium. (2005). Web content accessibility guidelines 1.0. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php

  • Zaidel, E., & Peters, A. M. (1981). Phonological encoding and ideographic reading by the disconnected-right hemisphere: Two case studies. Brain and Language, 14, 205–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Consortia

Soonhwa Seok, Boaventura DaCosta, Carolyn Kinsell, John C. Poggio, Edward L. Meyen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soonhwa Seok, Boaventura DaCosta, Carolyn Kinsell, John C. Poggio, Edward L. Meyen. Computer-Mediated Intersensory Learning Model for Students with Learning Disabilities. TECHTRENDS TECH TRENDS 54, 63–71 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-010-0385-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-010-0385-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation