Teaching addition strategies to students with learning difficulties

Abstract

Background & aims In recent years, there has been an increased interest in analyzing the mathematical performance of students with learning difficulties in order to provide them with teaching methods adapted to their needs. In particular, the importance of studying the type of informal strategy that students use when solving problems has been highlighted. Observing how these strategies emerge and develop in children with learning difficulties is crucial, as it allows us to understand how they develop a subsequent understanding of arithmetic operations. In this paper we study the effect of explicit instruction in addition strategies, focusing on the minimum addend strategy, and analyze the difficulties that arise during this process. Methods An adapted multiple-probe design across students with a microgenetic approach was employed to assess the effectiveness of the teaching instruction and the acquisition of the minimum addend strategy while solving addition word problems. The participants were three primary-school children (two boys and one girl) with learning difficulties, one of them diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. The instruction on the minimum addend strategy was sequenced into levels of abstraction based on the addends represented with and without manipulatives. Results The results show that the three participants were able to acquire the minimum addend strategy and transfer it to two-step problems. They all showed difficulties during the instructional process, with quantity comparison difficulties predominating. The instruction provided to address these and other difficulties is detailed for each participant. Conclusions The teaching of the minimum addend strategy has proven effective, and all three students acquired it throughout the instruction. The results concerning the student diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder are especially interesting given the lack of studies that focus on the strategies employed by students with this disorder to solve arithmetic problems. In this sense, the use of the microgenetic approach was especially useful to observe the type of spontaneous strategies used by this participant, and how they varied in response to the instruction. Implications Each study participant faced different difficulties and needed different periods of time to assimilate the new strategy. Conclusions are drawn for educators to help children with learning difficulties advance to more sophisticated strategies, so they can acquire these and subsequent mathematical concepts.

Comparison of Mathematics Problem-Solving Abilities in Autistic and Non-autistic Children: the Influence of Cognitive Profile

“…Some studies have already shown that the strategies and representations used by ASD children are variables that determine their performance (Bruno et al, 2021 ; Polo Blanco et al, 2021 ; Polo-Blanco & González-López, 2021 ; Polo-Blanco et al, 2022 ). Others have shown that some of the cognitive traits intrinsic to the disorder, such as low executive functioning profile, can directly interfere with mathematical performance and with implementing the actions that are needed to solve mathematical problems (Bull & Scerif, 2001 ; Kim & Cameron, 2016 ).…”

“…In particular, they have direct implications on the design of educational interventions in ASD children with mathematical difficulties. For instance, as seen in other mathematical contexts, ASD children may not acquire advanced strategies spontaneously, as non-ASD children often do, so they may benefit from explicit instruction in strategy use (Polo-Blanco & González-López, 2021 ). Interventions should also consider stimulating the cognitive functions involved in mathematical problem solving that are most affected in ASD population (cognitive flexibility, inhibition, ToM and verbal comprehension) (Westby & Robinson, 2014 ; Whalon & Cox, 2020 ).…”

“…Interventions should also consider stimulating the cognitive functions involved in mathematical problem solving that are most affected in ASD population (cognitive flexibility, inhibition, ToM and verbal comprehension) (Westby & Robinson, 2014 ; Whalon & Cox, 2020 ). Some evidence-based strategies for children with learning difficulties, such as Schema Based Instruction (SBI) (Fuchs et al, 2004 ) or the Conceptual Model-Based Problem Solving (COMPS) approach (Xin, 2018 ), have been successfully adapted to ASD children’ characteristics improving their ability to solve mathematical problems (Bruno et al, 2021 ; García Moya et al, 2022 ; Polo-Blanco & González-López, 2021 ; Polo-Blanco et al, 2021 , 2022 ; Root et al, 2017 ). Future empirical studies are needed to measure the effects of these adaptations on the development of some of the cognitive functions with lower scores found in ASD children.…”

Teaching Cartesian Product Problem Solving to Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder Using a Conceptual Model-Based Approach

“…Moreover, the inclusion of a checklist with guidelines for solving problems supports deficits in executive functions, such as planning, which are characteristic of individuals with ASD. In addition, as in other works that adapt methodologies for students with ASD (Polo-Blanco & García-Moya, 2021; Polo-Blanco et al, 2022; Root & Browder, 2019), modifications to the COMPS methodology have also been incorporated in this study. These include the pictogram sentences to support their understanding of the situation presented in the problem (García-Moya, 2018), the diagrams depicting the problem situation, as well as pictograms accompanying the instructions in the checklist.…”

Teaching Students With Mild Intellectual Disability to Solve Word Problems Using Schema-Based Instruction

“…Based on a common approach, each participant required different reinforcements and adaptations of the instruction to develop the desired problem-solving skills. It is essential that teachers present a sufficient variety of problems, know these teaching methods, and make careful plans that are tailored to the specific needs of each student (Polo-Blanco & González, 2021; Polo-Blanco et al, 2019; 2021).…”