Cognitive differences intrinsic to children with learning disabilities (LDs) have historically led to deficit assumptions concerning the mathematical experiences these children “need” or can access. We argue that the problem can be located not within children but instead as a mismatch between instruction and children’s unique abilities. To illustrate this possibility, we present the case of “Jim,” a fifth-grader with perceptual-motor LDs. Our ongoing analysis of Jim’s fractional reasoning in seven equal sharing based tutoring sessions suggests that Jim leveraged his knowledge of number facts and alternative representations to advance his reasoning.
In this study, we challenge the deficit perspective on mathematical knowing and learning for children labeled as LD, focusing on their struggles not as a within student attribute, but rather as within teacher-learner interactions. We present two cases of fifth-grade students labeled LD as they interacted with a researcher-teacher during two constructivist-oriented teaching experiments designed to foster a concept of unit fraction. Data analysis revealed three main types of interactions, and how they changed over time, which seemed to support the students’ learning: Assess, Cause and Effect Reflection, and Comparison/Prediction Reflection. We thus argue for an intervention in interaction that occurs in the instructional process for students with LD, which should replace attempts to “fix” ‘deficiencies’ that we claim to contribute to disabling such students.
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was amended in 1988 to require federal agencies to make their electronic and information technology (EIT) accessible to people with disabilities. Projects funded by the National Science Foundation should be 508 compliant to increase equal access to materials.
A compilation of resources for making your products and communications more accessible.
Consider the role project videos can play in dissemination of research with OSPrI describing their video experience, and NSF situating the work within their efforts to improve policymakers’ understanding of DR K–12 research and development.
A challenge for researchers and federal research funding institutions in the 21st century is how to get the word out on how research is pertinent and being used in by the field. According to Neild (2016, p1):
Neild, R.C. (2016, April). Federally-supported education research doesn't need a do-over. Brookings Institute SERIES: Evidence Speaks, Number 32 of 33. http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2016/04/07-federally-supported-research-doesnt-need-do-over-neild?rssid=education&utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=FeedBlitzRss&utm_content=Federally-supported+education+research+doesn%27t+need+a+do-over
Review themes related to culturally responsive STEM instruction, and generate ideas for advancing research and practice in this area.
A National Science Foundation Update