Meeting the Needs of Students With Learning Disabilities in Inclusive Mathematics Classrooms: The Role of Schema-Based Instruction on Mathematical Problem-Solving

The Impacts of Mathematics Instructional Strategy on Students with Autism: A Systematic Literature Review

“…In the 39 articles obtained, the most frequent method used by researchers was the schema-based method, as studied by Bae (2013), Casner (2016), Cox and Root (2018), Delisio et al (2018), Kasap and Ergenekon (2017), Rockwell (2012), Rockwell et al (2011) and . The schematic strategy emphasizes the grasp of procedural concepts and step-by-step skills, aided by visual representations in the form of images or diagrams, and numerical equations which are suitable to solve the problem (Fang et al, 2015;Jitendra & Star, 2011). In addition, this strategy emphasizes computational skills (addition and subtraction) and problem-solving (Forbringer & Fuchs, 2014;Rockwell, 2012).…”

Examining Implementation of Intensive Intervention in Mathematics

“…Yet few studies have focused on the issues that schools might face when implementing these components of RTI outside of the research-study context (Arden, Pentimonti, Cooray, & Jackson, in press). Because this paper focuses on intensive intervention, we bring to light the considerable research focused on intervention for at-risk students struggling with their grade level mathematics (e.g., Bottge, Ma, Gassaway, Butler, & Toland, 2014, Jitendra & Star, 2011Powell et al, 2015). Some studies have focused on exploring theoretical frameworks that drive instructional approaches across grade levels and domains, such as Enhanced Anchored Instruction (Bottge et al, 2014) and schema-based instruction (Fuchs et al, 2004;Jitendra & Star, 2011;Xin, 2008).…”

The Math Frame

“…Tackling mathematics word problems requires the ability to read, decipher the problem, determine what is unknown, understand arithmetic operations, choose appropriate operations, use strategies, attend, hold information in working memory, understand vocabulary, adjust thinking, and access metacognitive and self-regulation skills (Fuchs et al, 2008;Garrett, Mazzocco, & Baker, 2006;Hart, Petrill, Thompson, & Plomin, 2009;Jitendra & Star, 2011;Swanson, Jerman, & Zheng, 2008;Woodward et al, 2012). In addition, to successfully solve word problems, students must use one step as the foundation for the next step by breaking down a problem into its compo-nent parts (Scheiter, Gerjets, & Schuh, 2010), as well as recognizing what is similar and novel to the problem (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2005).…”

“…Specifically delineating the steps to solve word problems in mathematics (Wadlington & Wadlington, 2008) can help identify the supports students need to tackle word problems, such as adding visualization of word problems into the classroom (Scheiter et al, 2010;Swanson et al, 2011;Woodward et al, 2012). In addition, breaking down word problems into their component parts and partitioning the problems into schemas allows students to see the structural similarities and differences in problems and their solutions so that they are better able to identify and solve similar types of problems (Butler, Beckingham, & Novak Lauscher, 2005;Jitendra & Star, 2011).…”