Real World Use of Scientific Concepts: Integrating Situated Cognition with Explicit Instruction

Exceptional Children

Volumn 65, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 23-35

  Gersten, Russell ^a   Baker, Scott ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0003050870     PISSN: 00144029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/001440299806500102     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Belmont, J. M., & Butterfield, E. C. (1977). The instructional approach to developmental cognitive research. In R. Kail & J. Hagen (Eds.), Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 437-481). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.*
2. Bos, C. S., & Anders, P. L. (1990). Interactive teaching and learning: Instructional practices for teaching content and strategic knowledge. In T. E. Scruggs & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Intervention research in learning disabilities (pp. 166-185). New York: Springer-Verlag.*
3. Bottge, B., & Hasselbring, T. S. (1993). A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, 59, 556-566.
4. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-41.
5. Bulgren, J. A., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (1997). Use of a recall enhancement routine and strategies in inclusive secondary classes. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 12(4), 198-208.
6. Butterfield, E. C., Slocum, T. A., & Nelson, G. D. (1993). Cognitive and behavioral analyses of teaching and transfer: Are they different? In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition and instruction (pp. 192-257). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
7. Carnine, D. (1997). Instructional design in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 130-141.
8. Carnine, D., Jones, E., & Dixon, R. (1994). Mathematics: Educational tools for diverse learners. School Psychology Review, 23(3), 406-427.
9. Cawley, J., Miller, J., Sentman, R. & Bennett, S. (1993). Science for all children. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo.
10. Cawley, J. F. (1994). Science for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 67-71.
11. Dalton, B., Morocco, C. C., Tivnan, T., & Mead, P. R. (1997). Supported inquiry science: Teaching for conceptual change in urban and suburban science classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(6), 670-684.
12. Darch, C., & Carnine, D. (1986). Teaching content area material to learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 53, 240-246.
13. Education Development Center, Inc. (1991). Insights: A hands-on science module (K-6 curriculum unit). Newton, MA: Improving Elementary Urban Science Project.
14. Englert, C. S., Raphael, T. E., Anderson, L. M., Anthony, H. M., & Stevens, D. D. (1991). Making strategies and self-talk visible: Writing instruction in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 337-372.
15. Fuson, K. C. (1992). Research on learning and teaching addition and subtraction of whole numbers. In G. Leinhardt, R. Putnam, & R. Hattrup (Eds.), Analysis of arithmetic for mathematics teaching (pp. 53-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*
16. Gersten, R., & McInerney, M. (1997). What parents, teachers and researchers view as critical issues in special education research: Technical Report 97-1. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
17. Ginsberg, H. P. (1997). Mathematics learning disabilities: A view from developmental psychology. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(1), 20-33.
18. Goldman, S. R., Hasselbring, T. S., & the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1996). Achieving meaningful mathematics literacy for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 198-208.
19. Goodrich, B., & Stern, V. W. (1995, June). Teaching science and mathematics to students with learning disabilities: Challenges and resources. NSF/AAS Invitational Conference on Learning Disabilities and the Teaching of Science and Mathematics, Washington, DC.
20. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Improving learning disabled students' skills at composing essays: Self-instructional strategy training. Exceptional Children, 56, 201-214.
21. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Wearne, D. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.
22. Holahan, G. G., McFarland, J. & Picillo, B. A. (1994). Elementary school science for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 86-93.
23. Hollingsworth, M., & Woodward, J. (1993). Integrated learning: Explicit strategies and their role in problem-solving instruction for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 444-455.
24. Jones, E. D., Wilson, R., & Bhojwani, S. (1997). Mathematics instruction for secondary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 151-163.
25. Kelly, B., Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1990). Student error patterns as a function of curriculum design. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(1), 23-32.
26. Kolligian, J., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Intelligence, information processing, and specific learning disabilities: A triarchic synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(1), 8-17.
27. Losardo, A., & Bricker, D. (1994). A comparison study: Activity-based intervention and direct instruction. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 98(6), 744-765.
28. Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1992). Science for students with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 62(4), 377-411.
29. Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1994). Text versus hand-on science curriculum: Implications for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 72-85.
30. Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., & Butcher, K. (1997). How effective is inquiry learning for students with mild disabilities? Journal of Special Education, 31(2), 199-211.
31. Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Chung, S. (1997, March). Qualitative and quantitative outcomes associated with inclusive science teaching. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.
32. McKinney, J. D., Osborne, S. S., & Schulte, A. C. (1993). Academic consequences of learning disability: Longitudinal prediction of outcomes at 11 years of age. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8(1), 19-27.
33. Miller, P. H. (1985). Metacognition and attention. In D. L. Forrest-Pressely, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance Vol. 2 (pp. 181-218). New York: Academic Press.*
34. Montague, M. (1997). Cognitive strategy instruction in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 164-177.
35. Moore, L. J., & Carnine, D. W. (1989). A comparison of two approaches to teaching ratio and proportions to remedial and learning disabled students: Active teaching with either basal or empirically validated curriculum design material. Remedial and Special Education, 10(4), 28-37.
36. National Academy of Education. (1995). Improving education through standards-based reform. Stanford, CA.
37. Nolet, V., & Tindal, G. (1993). Special education in content area classes: Development of a model and practical procedures. Remedial and Special Education, 14(1), 36-48.
38. Pugach, M. C., & Warger, C. L. (1993). Curriculum considerations. In J. Goodland & T. Lovitt (Eds.), Integrating general and special education (pp. 125-148). New York: Merrill.*
39. Systems Impact, Inc. (1985). Mastering fractions. Washington, DC: Author.
40. Usiskin, Z. (1993). Lessons from the Chicago mathematics project. Educational Leadership, 50(8), 14-18.
41. Williams, J., Fuchs, L., Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (1997). Reading comprehension: A research summary for students with learning disabilities. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
42. Wong, B. Y. L. (1994). Instructional parameters promoting transfer of learned strategies in students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 110-120.
43. Woodward, J. (1994). The role of models in secondary science instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 94-104.
44. Woodward, J., & Baxter, J. (1997). The effects of an innovative approach to mathematics on academically low-achieving students in mainstreamed settings. Exceptional Children, 63, 373-388.
45. Woodward, J., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1988). Teacher problem solving through computer simulations. American Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 7-28.
46. Woodward, J., & Gersten, R. (1992). Innovative technology for secondary learning disabled students: A multi-faceted study of implementation. Exceptional Children, 58, 407-421.
47. Woodward, J., & Noell, J. (1992). Science instruction at the secondary level: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24(5), 277-284.