Ted S. Hasselbring

A Comparison of Two Approaches for Teaching Complex, Authentic Mathematics Problems to Adolescents in Remedial Math Classes

Two groups of adolescents with learning difficulties in mathematics were compared on their ability to generate solutions to a contextualized problem after being taught problem-solving skills under two conditions, one involving standard word problems, the other involving a contextualized problem on videodisc. All problems focused on adding and subtracting fractions in relation to money and linear measurement. Both groups of students improved their performance on solving word problems, but students in the contextualized problem group did significantly better on the contextualized problem posttest and were able to use their skills in two transfer tasks that followed instruction.

LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR OLDER STRUGGLING READERS: WHAT IS THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY?

In this article, we describe the development of a technology-based intervention program for older struggling readers. Developed over several years, this program was based on a theoretical understanding of reading acquisition. In addition, it capitalized on pedagogical principles that can be enhanced through the use of integrated media. The end result of this R&D activity is a powerful prototypic program that has been shown to enhance the reading skills of middle and high-school students who have struggled with reading during most of their school careers.

Achieving Meaningful Mathematics Literacy for Students with Learning Disabilities

In this article we consider issues relevant to the future of mathematics instruction and achievement for students with learning disabilities. The starting point for envisioning the future is the changing standards for mathematics learning and basic mathematical literacy. We argue that the shift from behaviorist learning theories to constructivist and social constructivist theories (see Rivera, this series) provides an opportunity to develop and implement a hybrid model of mathematics instruction. The hybrid model we propose embeds, or situates, important skill learning in meaningful contexts. We discuss some examples of instructional approaches to complex mathematical problem solving that make use of meaningful contexts. Evaluation data on these approaches have yielded positive and encouraging results for students with learning disabilities as well as general education students. Finally, we discuss various ways in which technology is important for realizing hybrid instructional models in mathematics.

Assistive Technology: Are the Necessary Skills and Knowledge Being Developed at the Preservice and Inservice Levels?.

Assistive Technology (AT) devices and services have been legally mandated for several years. However, the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Act Amendments P.L. 105–17 (IDEA1997), which states that every student with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) must be considered for AT, had enormous implications impacting approximately six million school-aged students identified with a disability. As a result, states have written assistive technology policies, procedures, guidelines, and technical assistance manuals to reflect the change in federal laws. In order to comply with state policies, school districts are in need of qualified personnel to plan, develop, and implement assistive devices and services. However, because of the lack of AT degree and certification programs at the preservice level, it is often problematic for districts to find AT trained personnel, thus, directly impacting the services that can be provided for students with disabilities.

Learning with technology: Theoretical and empirical perspectives

Our major goal in this paper is to argue that existing, off-the-shelf microcomputer and video technology can help students develop the skills, the knowledge, and the confidence necessary to function effectively in todays complex society. However, we also emphasize that technology by itself cannot solve the problems facing instruction; it has to be used effectively. In order to use technology effectively, information must be gathered from the study of cognition, instruction and culture. Throughout this article our discussions of technology will be related to the research literature in these areas.

An Evaluation of a Level-One Instructional Videodisc Program:

In this project, a Level 1 videodisc program called “Mastering Fractions” was evaluated. The evaluation was conducted in two parts. Part 1 was a controlled study that compared the “Mastering Fractions” program to a more traditional fractions curriculum while controlling for any novelty effect of the videodisc medium. Part 2 of the evaluation was a descriptive study that examined the use of “Mastering Fractions” in non-experimentally controlled classroom environments. The results of the evaluation indicated that the use of the “Mastering Fractions” program resulted in significant gains in fraction skills and computations. Further, it was concluded that the achievement gains found in the study were attributed to the instructional content of the “Mastering Fractions” program and not to the novelty of the videodisc medium. Finally, it was found that even though the program had a positive effect on student achievement, the effectiveness of “Mastering Fractions,” like other instructional programs, is somewhat dependent upon the commitment and quality of the teacher using the materials.

A Possible Future of Special Education Technology.

Like other authors in this issue I was asked to write this article and predict the future of special education technology over the next five to ten years. This is not the first time I have attempted this task. I did a similar paper in 1997, and as I wrote back then, it is presumptuous to believe that any future can be predicted, especially one that involves technology [Hasselbring, 1997). In preparing this article, I found that reviewing my 1997 attempt at prognostication was enlightening but humbling. After reading this article, you might also enjoy seeing how well I did on my last attempt at predicting the future. Over the years my thinking on futuristic issues has been shaped by many things: tal movies, such as The Terminator and Blade Runner; (bl books, such as The Age of Spiritual Machines by Ray Kurzweil (1999) and Being Digital by Nicholas Negroponte (1995); and numerous articles in which the authors have predicted a variety of technological futures. However, my thinking on the future has been most affected by an article that I read in MacWorld in the mid 1980s. The article was by Alan Kay, then chief scientist at Apple Computer, who was speculating on possible technologies we might encounter in the coming years. Kay argued that it really is not possible to predict the future, rather that the only way to truly predict the future is to invent it. Those words have stuck with me and have shaped my thinking about the future of special education technology. In reality, we cannot predict the future of special education technology, but we can invent it. Further, I believe that we can be better inventors of the future by looking at past and current trends in a variety of fields. By examining these trends, and by looking at what has worked in the past as well as at what technologies are on the horizon, we will be better able to build a successful future. I will not attempt to discuss the broad range of technologies found in special education. Instead, I will focus on three trends and technologies that are clearly visible today and that I feel will have a significant impact on the lives of students with high-incidence disabilities and on the future of special education. 1. The development of computing devices that will exponentially increase in speed and capacity while decreasing in size and cost. 2. The delivery of information and instructional materials anytime and anyplace as a result of advances in broadband and wireless technology. 3. The development of instructional materials and practices that are based on science-of-learning principles.

National Assistive Technology Research Institute.

The Office of Special Education Programs, U. S. Department of Education, provided four years of funding to establish a National Assistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI) at the University of Kentucky. The primary goals of NATRI are to examine factors related to the planning, development, implementation, and evaluation of assistive technology (AT) services in schools, and to disseminate the findings in ways that will assist school personnel to develop or improve AT policies and practices for students with disabilities. Seven areas of research will be addressed: (a) status of AT use in schools, (b) policies, procedures, and resources that school districts use, (c) AT decisions made by individualized education programs (IEP) teams, (d) training and technical support needed by service providers, (e) integration of AT into learning environments, (f) effectiveness of AT on the academic, social, and functional performance of students, and (g) preparation of professionals in AT. The primary research questions and methodologies being used to conduct research in the seven areas are described. An overview of dissemination procedures also is provided and ways that people can, participate in NATRI research activities are explained.

Making Knowledge Meaningful: Applications of Hypermedia

This article presents information on a new development in technology called hypermedia. Hypermedia is discussed in relation to the “inert knowledge” problem that pervades much of the instruction in regular and special education. The historical roots of hypermedia are discussed as well as a theoretical rationale for why hypermedia can be a powerful tool for making knowledge meaningful. Finally, examples of prototype hypermedia environments for use with special-needs learners are presented.

Improving the Quality of Instruction: Roles for Dynamic Assessment

Dynamic assessment is a relatively new and promising approach to educational evaluation. The term dynamic assessment, as defined in this discussion, refers to attempts to assess individuals’ responsiveness to teaching (Feuerstein, Rand, & Hoffman, 1979) or “zone of sensitivity to instruction” (Vygotsky, 1978; Wood, 1980; Wood, Wood, & Middleton, 1978). The methods of assessment are different from those used in standardized, “static” assessments such as intelligence tests and achievement tests, where instruction on the part of the testor invalidates results. In dynamic assessment, instruction is essential. The critical components of dynamic assessment are systematic attempts (a) to change various components of tasks in order to assure that the examinee understands what is required, and (b) to experiment with different approaches to teaching the examinee how to complete the task. Both of these elements are included in order to determine specific instructional techniques that are most effective for each child.