Keywords
enhancing engagement
vocabulary acquisition in mathematics
quasi-experimental
New York
How to Cite
Abstract
This study investigated the effectiveness of digital flashcards in enhancing engagement and vocabulary acquisition in mathematics among students with learning disabilities. The researcher used a quasi-experimental specifically the Pretest-Posttest Design. Descriptive statistics (mean) was utilized to present the students’ engagement level and vocabulary before and after exposure to the traditional and digital flashcards. The results of the study revealed that before exposure to the print flashcards, the students had a very low level of engagement while they had a moderate level of engagement in the digital flashcards. Meanwhile, the student’s vocabulary level before exposure to print and digital flashcards did not meet the target. On the other hand, the students have a moderate level of engagement after exposure to the print flashcards, while they have a high level of engagement in the digital flashcards. Meanwhile, the students have a vocabulary level that is Approaching the target after exposure to print flashcards and at target after being taught the digital flashcards. Test of difference showed that the student’s level of engagement and vocabulary before exposure to the treatments were significantly different between the traditional and computer-based learning groups. Those in the print flashcards group had a lower engagement and vocabulary level than the digital flashcard group. The magnitude of the difference between digital flashcard learning and print flashcard treatment with respect to the level of engagement is small. However, the effect size for their difference in increasing the student’s vocabulary is much larger than typical. In conclusion, the use of digital flashcards is an effective intervention than print flashcards in enhancing the vocabulary of the students, but not much in the level of engagement. Thus, the use of digital flashcards in teaching mathematics improves the vocabulary acquisition of children with disabilities and is hereby recommended by the researcher.References
Adams, Audrey M. (2014) Pedagogical Underpinning of Computer-based Learning. Journal of Advanced nursing 46 (1). 5-12. 2004
Anderson, J. A., Kutash, K., & Duchnowski, A. J. (2012). A Comparison of the
academic progress of students with EBD and students with LD. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 9, 106-115.
Ashcraft, M. H., Krause, J. A., & Hopko, D. R. (2017). Is math anxiety a mathematical learning disability? In D. B. Berch & M. M. M. Mazzocco (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children? The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 329–348). Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Bar, N. (2015) Difficulties Experienced by Special Education Novice Teachers in Their Induction Year at the Various Special Education Frameworks in Israel: Outline of a Research Study. Adam Mickiewicz University Press, 377-392. ISBN 978-83-232- 0000-0. ISSN 1233-6688.
Barak, M., (2016). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science
Education, 47, 283–303.
Brown, K and Broido, E. (2015). Engaging Students with Disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (2015). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: McNally Cawley, J., Hayden, S., Cade, E., & Baker-Kroczynski, S. (2012). Including students with disabilities into the general education mathematics classroom. Exceptional Children, 68, 423- 435.
Chambers, D. (2010) Assistive Technology to Support Inclusive Education Children, 70, 299-322.Jitendra, A. K., Edwards, L. L., Sacks, G., & Jacobson, L. A. (2014). What research says about vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities. Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP Edyburn, D. (2015). Efficacy of Assistive Technology Interventions Edyburn, D. L. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(1), 33-41.
Egilson ST and Traustadottir R. (2019). Participation of students with physical disabilities in the school environment. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy. May 1; 63(3):264. PMID: 19522135 Forgrave, K. E. (2012). Assistive technology: Empowering students with learning disabilities. The Clearing House, 75(3), 122-126.
Evans, Douglas, Sabornie, Edward (2016) Comparing Characteristics of High-Incidence Disability Groups: A Descriptive Review Fauconnier J, Dickinson HO, Beckung E, Marcelli M, McManus V, Michelsen SI (2019) Participation in life situations of 8–12 year old children with cerebral palsy: cross sectional European study. BMJ. Apr 24; 338:b1458. Federici, S.2017. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook Federici, M Scherer (2012) Assistive technology assessment handbook Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W. A. W. (2015). Teaching and learning with technology:
Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(2), 175-191. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.23596
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2014). Implications of constructivism for teaching writing to students with special needs. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 275-289.
Guskin, S. L., & Spicker, H. H. (2018). Educational research in mental retardation. In International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 3, pp. 217-278). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0074- 7750(08)60013-0 Hudson, R. F., Lane, H. B., & Pullen, P. C. (2015). Reading fluency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how?. The Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702-714. https://doi. org/10.1598/rt.58.8.1 Hughes, Marie Tejero and Talbott, Elizabeth Wiley (2017) Handbook of Diversity in Special Education Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang,
S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: a mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449- 473.
Hwang AW, Yen CF, Liou TH, Simeonsson RJ, Chi WC, Lollar DJ (2015). Participation of children with disabilities in Taiwan: The gap between independence and frequency. PloS one. May 11; 10(5): e0126693. Jones, A., & Stapleton, M. (2017).
2 million kids and counting-mobile science laboratories drive student interest in STEM. Science in Context, PLoS Biol 15(5): e2001692. Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2019). Preparing teachers for inclusive classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 535-542. Kauffman, J. M., Hallahan, D. P., & Pullen, P. C. (2017). Handbook of special education. Routledge.
Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P. (2018). The use of computer tools to support meaningful learning. AACE journal, 16(1), 77-92. Kramer JM, Olsen S, Mermelstein M, Balcells A, Liljenquist K. (2012) Youth with disabilities’ perspectives of the environment and participation: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Child: Care, Health and Development. Nov; 38(6):763–77.
Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2013). Mathematics interventions for children with special needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 97–Lane, K. L., Barton-Arwood, S. M., Nelson, J. R., & Wehby, J. (2018). Academic performance of students with emotional and behavioral disorders served in a self-contained setting. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 43-62.
Lawson, H. A. (2015). Empowering people, facilitating community development, and contributing to sustainable development: The social work of sport, exercise, and physical education programs. Sport, education and society, 10(1), 135- 160. Lee,
A. (2012). The effects of computer-based learning activities and school contextual factors on student math achievement. Leadership Policy Quarterly, 1, 58–72. Lynch, S., Taymans, J., Watson, W. A., Ochsendorf, R. J., Pyke, C., & Szesze, M.
J. (2017). Effectiveness of a highly rated mathematics urriculum unit for students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 73, 202.
Macho, S. (2015). Differences Among Standardized Test Scores Due to Factors of Internet Access at Home and Family Affluence. West Virginia University: United
States. Mason, C., Field, S., & Sawilowsky, S. (2014). Implementation of self[1] determination activities and student participation in IEPs. Exceptional Children, 70(4), 441-451.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2012). Effective instruction for special education.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Levin, J. R. (2015). Mnemonic strategy instruction with learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 94-10 McCleery, J. A., & Tindal, G. A. (2016). Teaching the scientific method to at-risk students and students with learning disabilities through concept anchoring and explicit instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 7-18.
Mcguire, J. M., Scott, S. S., & Shaw, S. F. (2016). Universal design and its applications in educational environments. Remedial and special education, 27, 166-175.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2017). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. John Wiley & Sons.
Najafi. 2018. Handbook of Electronic Assistive Technology
Newman, Wagner, Knokey, Marder, Nagle, Shaver, Wei, et al., (2011).The Post High School Outcomes of Young Adults with Disabilities up to 8 Years After High School: A report From the Longitudinal Transition Study-2(NLTS) September 2011
No Child Left Behind Act. A Desktop Reference. (2012). Office of the Under Secretary of Education. Washington, DC.
Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Routledge.
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS). (2004). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004 Reauthorization. Washington DC: Author Retrieved May 17, 2022
Pastor, P. N., & Reuben, C. A. (2018). Diagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disability: United States, 2004-2006. Vital and health statistics. Series 10, Data from the National Health Survey, (237), 1.
Pearman, C. J. (2018). Independent reading of CD-ROM storybooks: Measuring comprehension with oral retellings. The Reading Teacher, 61(8), 594–602. Retrieved from doi:10.1598/RT.61.8.1
Ploog, B. O., Scharf, A., Nelson, D., & Brooks, P. J. (2013). Use of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) to enhance social, communicative, and language development in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 43(2), 301-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012- 1571-3
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2012). Quasi-Experimental Design: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rea, P. J., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2012). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68, 203-223.
Rea, P. J., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2012). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional children, 68(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402902068 00204
Reid, R., Gonzalez, J. E., Nordness, P. D., Trout, A., & Epstein, M. H. (2014). A meta analysis of the academic status of students with emotional/behavioral disturbance.
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2016). Prediction of dropout among students with mild disabilities: A case for the inclusion of student engagement variables. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 276-292.
Roorda DL, Koomen HM, Spilt JL, Oort FJ (2011). The influence of affective teacher– student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta- analytic approach. Review of Educational Research. Dec; 81(4):493–529.
Johnson, K. M., & McCabe, P. P. (2015). Gates-MacGinitie reading tests fourth edition forms S and T. In B. S. Plake & R. A. Spies (Eds.), The sixteenth mental measurements yearbook (Vol. 16). Lincoln: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
Rusli, M., & Negara, K., (2017). The effect of animation in multimedia computer- based learning and learning style to the learning results. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education,18(4), 177–90.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective sixth edition.
Pearson.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2013). Current Approaches to Mathematics Education Implications for Mainstream Instruction of Students with Disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 15-24
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Berkeley, S., & Graetz, J. E. (2010) Do special education interventions improve learning of secondary content? a.meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 437-449
Serin, O. (2011). The effects of the computer-based instruction on the achievement and problem-solving skills of the science and technology students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 183–201
Shriner, J. G., & Destefano, L. (2013). Participation and accommodation in state assessment: The role of individualized education programs. Exceptional Children, 69(2), 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402903069 00202
Sklar, L. (2015). How do special education teachers use the computer with students with challenging behaviors as a classroom management tool? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Akron, Akron, OH.
Smith, Stephen W. and Kortering, Larry, J. (2016). The Effectiveness of the computer in completing a set of well-planned tasks that requirethe use of computers Journal of Special Education, 18 (2) (28-55). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ11278 13.pdf
Steele, M. (2017). Teaching Mathematics to students with learning differences. Mathematics Teacher, 74, 24-27.
Stendal, K. (2012). How do people with disability use and experience virtual worlds and ICT: A literature review. Journal for Virtual Worlds Research, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.4101/jvwr.v5i1.6173
Stetter, M. E., & Hughes, M. T. (2010). Using story grammar to assist students with learning disabilities and reading difficulties improve their comprehension. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(1), 115-151. Retrieved from doi:10.1353/ etc.0.0087
Stultz, S. L. (2017). Computer[1]Assisted Mathematics Instruction for Students With
Specific Learning Disability: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(4), 210– 219. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434 17725881
Therrien, W. J., Taylor, J. C., Hosp, J. L., Kaldenberg, E. R., & Gorsh, J. (2011). Mathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 188-203.
Thompson, G. (2015) Text-to-speech reading intervention with first-grade students. Retrieved 08 April 2022 from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/vol 4no1/pdf/ ThompsonVAM_0505.pdf/ [R ef list]
Turner, N. D. (2013). Preparing preservice teachers for inclusion in secondary classrooms. Education-Indianapolis Then Chula Vista, 123, 491-495.
Twyman, T., & Tindal, G. (2016). Using a computer-adapted, conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5-16.
Vaughn, S., Levy, S., Coleman, M., & Bos, C. S. (2015). Reading Instruction for Students with LD and EBD A Synthesis of Observation Studies. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 2-13.
Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, p., and Marder, C. (2017). Perceptions and Expectations of Youth With Disabilities. A Special Topic Report of Findings From the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2007- 3006). Menlo park, Ca: SRi international.
Westwood, P. (2017). Commonsense methods for children with special educational needs. Routledge.
Whalen, C., Liden, L., Ingersoll, B., Dallaire, E., & Liden, S. (2016). Behavioral improvements associated with computer-assisted instruction for children with developmental disabilities. The Journal of Speech and Language Pathology–Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 11. 10.1037/h0100182
Zhao, Z, (2017). Speech technology and its potential for special education. Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(3), 35– doi.org/10.1177/01626434070220