Mathematics Achievement of Hearing Impaired Adolescents in Different Placements

Kluwin, Thomas N.; Moores, Donald F.

doi:10.1177/001440298905500407

Cited by 31 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, analysis of the data in these studies reveals that there are other confounding variables, namely the difficulty of finding an appropriate cohort match across special school and inclusive settings (Zweibel and Allen, 1988;Kluwin and Moores, 1989;Holt, 1994).…”

Section: Background: Research Into Mathematics and Deaf Pupil Achievementioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematics and deaf children: an exploration of barriers to success

Swanwick¹,

Oddy²,

Roper³

2005

Deafness Educ. Int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Background: Research Into Mathematics and Deaf Pupil Achievementioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematics and deaf children: an exploration of barriers to success

Swanwick¹,

Oddy²,

Roper³

2005

Deafness Educ. Int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are widespread indications that the mathematical and problem-solving experiences provided to most DHH children in school are insufficient to achieve the desired academic outcomes (Kluwin and Moores 1989;Pagliaro and Kritzer 2005). In a detailed analysis of US data, Traxler (2000) showed that DHH students generally achieve only at the 80th percentile of the average scores attained by hearing students in mathematics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence‐based practice in educating deaf and hard‐of‐hearing children: teaching to their cognitive strengths and needs

Marschark

Spencer²,

Adams

et al. 2011

European Journal of Special Needs Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a second study on the mathematics achievement of students with hearing impairments who were taught in different placements, Kluwin and Moores (1989) again found that the quality of the instruction, not the placement, was the main predictor of students' achievement. Although they did find, not surprisingly, that student background factors were a primary determinant of achievement and that student achievement was considered when deciding whether or not to mainstream a youngster, the placement the youngster received in and of itself was not connected to achievement.…”

Section: Placement and Quality Instructionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Best Academic Practices for Inclusive Classrooms

King‐Sears¹

2017

focusXchild

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerning the title of this article: What is meant by "best?" Best means the finest, the greatest, the highest. "Best" for whom? Effective inclusion is best for everyone, not just students with disabilities. "Academic" practices toward what type of goal? Is the academic goal for a given student in the cognitive, affective, or psychomotor domain of learning? For example, a student with a learning disability may be working on cognitive IEP goals that emphasize reading and writing skills. A student with emotional or behavioral disorders may have affective IEP goals that emphasize ways to deal effectively with frustration. If a student with severe cognitive disabilities has affective IEP goals related to communicating during social situations, is the communication considered a cognitive area, or even a psychomotor area, for that student? A student with a physical disability may have psychomotor IEP goals that relate to reaching, manipulating, and movement. For each of these students, academics can encompass any of the domains of learning. Academic practices, therefore, are not confined to traditional content achievement areas such as reading, mathematics, and science.Conversely, are there best academic practices for exclusive, or segregated, settings? Baker ( 1994) contends that servicing students in separate environments came about through measurements that indicated a student was not successful in the mass educational system of the times, and not as a result of measures comparing students' success in noninclusive educational practices to inclusive ones. Similarly, Sobsey and Dreimanis (1993) note that a segregated service delivery model did not develop as a result of empirical research or evaluation.More recently, court decisions have placed the burden of proof on school systems to provide data that describe students' performance in inclusive environments with supplementary aids and services prior to removing students from these environments to more segregated ones (Yell, 1995). Baker concludes that current evidence that does compare students' achievement in integrated to segregated environments does not support the use of noninclusive environments for the education of students with disabilities.A mistaken impression of inclusion is that special education is not needed. The fallacy is that if more students with disabilities spend more time in general education classrooms, the numbers of students who need specialized services diminish such that the quantity of students for a special educator's caseload eliminates the need for as many special education teachers. On the contrary, the need for specialized services and special educators is not re-

show abstract

Mathematics Achievement of Hearing Impaired Adolescents in Different Placements

Cited by 31 publications

References 4 publications

Mathematics and deaf children: an exploration of barriers to success

Mathematics and deaf children: an exploration of barriers to success

Evidence‐based practice in educating deaf and hard‐of‐hearing children: teaching to their cognitive strengths and needs

Best Academic Practices for Inclusive Classrooms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About