Cognitive Strategies for Teaching the Mildly Handicapped

Sheinker, Alan; Sheinker, Jan; Stevens, Linda J.

doi:10.17161/foec.v17i1.7465

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We have in mind a vision of the teacher as a model of the learning-to-learn activities, including self-management techniques, that appear to be necessary for progress beyond primary skill levels. As Sheinker et al (1984) noted, many learning disabled students reach a learning plateau at the fourthor fifth-grade level. Movement beyond this plateau requires that students know how to learn.…”

Section: Learning Disabilities Microcomputers Problem Solving and mentioning

confidence: 88%

“…It has often been noted that learning disabled students are not very successful problem solvers. They are characterized as disregarding relevant information and persisting with unsuccessful alternatives (Diener & Dweck, 1978); as not evaluating their own performance or systematically planning for skills application (Kavale, 1980;Kotsonsis & Patterson, 1980;Meichenbaum, 1983); and as failing to transfer learning from one setting to another (Sheinker, Sheinker, & Stevens, 1984). As a consequence, a number of researchers have stressed the inclusion of metacognitive training as an element in any instructional/training package.…”

Section: Learning Disabilities Microcomputers Problem Solving and mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Information Processing and Educational Microcomputer Technology

Goldman

Pellegrino

1987

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microcomputer technology has enormous potential for altering the educational experiences and outcomes of learning handicapped youngsters. This article explores Wo particular areas of the learning process that appear to be fertile ground for implementing effective microcomputer technology. The first area is that of extended practice and its role in the development of increased automaticity of basic information processing skills. Several examples are presented of empirical research employing extended, microcomputer-based, daily practice on basic mathematics and reading tasks with learning disabled students. The second area discussed involves problem solving and metacognitive activities. The teacher, microcomputer, and learner are envisaged as three integrally related aspects of the microeducational environment. Microcomputer technology stimulates and enables innovative role definition for each. Finally, several potentially problematic issues related to tool use and to information processing characteristics of learning handicapped populations are discussed.T echnological innovations have a way of capturing the imagination of even the most shopworn psychologists and educators. Over the past five years, those of us with interests in the educational implications of information processing accounts of learning have had high hopes that the microcomputer would expand instructional possibilities and school experiences, especially of the learning handicapped. There are two major aspects of the learning process where the microcomputer appears to have potential for optimizing the educational environments of learning handicapped youngsters. Both are related to two well-documented characteristics of these exceptional children:1. Disabled learners tend to exhibit exceptionally slow rates of learning, first in acquiring new information and then in developing further facility with newly acquired cognitive skills.2. Disabled learners appear to display little evidence of spontaneous metacognitive behavior or awareness of their own cognitive and learning activities.With respect to the first characteristic, current information processing accounts of cognitive skill acquisition suggest that facility with many types of newly acquired concepts and information comes about through explicit periods of extended practice. Such facility is important because it allows learners to apportion their fixed attentional resources wisely. State-of-theart microcomputer technology permits the realization of extended practice applications in at least some skill areas. In the first section of this paper, we review current information processing accounts of cognitive skill acquisition and specifically discuss the role of extended practice. We then review some general issues regarding learning disabled populations, microcomputers, and extended practice instructional applications. Findings are presented from a program of empirical research suggesting that positive outcomes are associated with extended practice on the microcomputer in two basic skills areas, wo...

show abstract

Section: Learning Disabilities Microcomputers Problem Solving and mentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Learning Disabilities Microcomputers Problem Solving and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Information Processing and Educational Microcomputer Technology

Goldman

Pellegrino

1987

J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…What effect does the cognitive shift from concrete to abstract in learning have on the model's implementation and results? Is it not reasonable to wonder if implementation of materials and methodologies consistent with lower levels of learning might cause earlier plateaus in achievement than the current fifth-grade plateaus reported by some researchers (Deshler, Schumaker, Alley, Warner, & Clark, 1982;Sheinker, Sheinker, & Stevens, 1984)?…”

Section: Concernsmentioning

confidence: 96%

An Analysis of One of the Cornerstones Of the Regular Education Initiative

Anderegg¹,

Vergason²

1988

Exceptional

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years there have been calls to improve the interfacing of regular education and special education (Greenburg, 1987). Some of the advocates have proposed a merging of special education and regular education into one system (Lilly, 1986; Stainback & Stainback, 1984; Will, I 984, I 985). It is hard to look at the special education delivery systems and the legal concept of least restrictive environment and not to see that special and regular education are two parts of a system that must have a close working relationship and be more unified than they have been before. The purpose of this article, however, is not to debate the merits of the regular education initiative, or the interfacing of regular and special education. Instead we will look at one of its cornerstones, analyze• the problems inherent in its application, and express our concerns about its widespread implementation. BACKGROUND As Assistant Secretary of Education, Madeline Will has been the torch bearer for this movement. Will (1984, 1985) articulated the need for regular education and special education to be combined, with the local school principal being empowered as the instructional leader. Robson (in Greenburg, 1987) has suggested that this arrangement already has been approached in the job roles of principals. Will introduced her proposal for the Regular Education Initiative in speeches and in journal articles. Further, she established policy, including a National Task Force to Advance the Regular Education Initiative, to facilitate the interfacing of special education and regular education. Among its members is Margaret Wang. Although Will is generally considered to be the initiator of the concept, the influence of Wang and her associates, as revealed in the literature, was paramount in shaping Will's thinking. In fact, Wang's Adaptive Learning Environment Model (ALEM) is central to Will's regular education initiative movement (Wang & Reynolds, 1985). Development of the model was funded by both the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation and the National Follow Through Program (dealing with the education of disadvantaged children).

show abstract

“…Therefore, special education research on various approaches to and targets for use ofCBT methods with mildly handicapped students has burgeoned. Reviews of experimental findings and speculations about their implications for special education have appeared in unusually rapid succession (e.g., see Abikoff, 1979;Harris, 1982;Rooney & Hallahan, 1985;Sheinker, Sheinker, & Stevens, 1984). Although CBT has not been viewed as a method for enhancing acquisition of basic skills, it not only might prove useful for facilitating acquisition of basic skills but also might provide a model for conceptualizing a truly "special" education curriculum that would address rate as well as content of learning problems for those described as mildly handicapped.…”

Section: Elements Of Cognitive Behavioral Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive-Behavioral Training in the Curriculum: Time, Slow Learners, and Basic Skills

Gerber¹

2018

Exceptional

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whatever disagreement exists concerning identification of various subtypes of mildly handicapped (MH) learners, a consensus probably exists that these students learn at a slower rate than do their normally achieving peers. The idea of "slower rate" implies managerial as well as cognitive-behavioral concerns. In part, slower rate of acquisition is a function of discrepancies between time allocated by teachers for learning and time during which MH students are cognitively engaged with the content of learning tasks (i.e., academic learning time). MH students may be more predisposed to exh~bit "off.:task," or inappropriate task orientation, behaviors than their normally achieving peers. These students quite literally "waste" time, presenting teachers with difficult management problems. If task orientation behaviors were the only problems, however, academic gains for these students should be obtainable simply by increasing the percentage of allocated time that they appear to be actively engaged in learning. In fact, this line of reasoning has led to many intervention strategies that have sought to increase the probability of "on-task" behaviors through use of adult managed (e.g., see Kauffman & Hallahan, 1979) or student managed (e.g., see Hallahan & Sapona, 1983) procedures. Another line of thought-one for which practical implications are less well researched in special education-holds that even under conditions of optimal attentional behavior during tasks, MH students are always "slower" learners because they have difficulty allocating attention efficiently to information within tasks. (For general discussion of evidence favoring an attentional deficit hypothesis, see Hallahan & Reeve, 1980; for contrary evidence and arguments, see a recent paper by Samuels & Miller, 1985). If this hypothesis is true,• MH studel)ts, under available conditions of instruction, will require absolutely more learning time than faster learning peers if they are to develop similar levels of mastery and automaticity. Therefore, slower rates of acquisition present instructional design, as well as general managerial, problems.

show abstract

Cognitive Strategies for Teaching the Mildly Handicapped

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Information Processing and Educational Microcomputer Technology

Information Processing and Educational Microcomputer Technology

An Analysis of One of the Cornerstones Of the Regular Education Initiative

Cognitive-Behavioral Training in the Curriculum: Time, Slow Learners, and Basic Skills

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About