Studying Virtual Manipulatives Paired With Explicit Instruction to Teach Algebraic Equations to Students With Learning Disabilities

Abstract

Over the last two decades, the significance of academic achievement for students with disabilities in K-12 education has increased. To meet the needs of this population, educators turned to innovative strategies and technologies for instructional support in the classroom. For students with a learning disability, the need for such solutions is vital to address many of the academic struggles they face in the area of mathematics education. One evidence-based strategy shown to support instruction for students with a learning disability is the use of manipulatives. Although concrete manipulatives were extensively studied for this population, the virtual form of this technology lacks comparable research. Using a multiple probe design across three secondary students with a learning disability in mathematics, this study assessed the benefits of an instructional strategy using a virtual manipulative balance paired with explicit instruction to teach multistep linear equations. Results showed increased percent accuracy and independence scores for all three students across an intervention and maintenance phase. These findings and their broader implications for the field of mathematics education are discussed.

A Systematic Review of Interventions for Algebraic Concepts and Skills of Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities

“…In three studies, five out of 12 students qualified for free or reduced‐price lunch or were of below average SES. Only one study reported the participants’ English learner status (Satsangi, Hammer, Hogan, 2018). Regarding setting, three studies took place in vacant classrooms, three in a conference or supply room, one in two math classrooms, one in a resource classroom, and one in an office; three studies did not specifically report the setting.…”

“…Across domains, studies reflected between one and four content standards within their studies. Specifically, 8 of the 12 studies reflected one content standard, two studies (Hunt & Vasquez, 2014; Satsangi, Hammer, Hogan, 2018) reflected two content standards, one study reflected three content standards (Hutchinson, 1993), and one study (Park & McLeod, 2018) reflected four content standards.…”

“…Second, six studies scrutinized the domains of HSA: REI and CED. Three studies (Satsangi et al., 2016; Satsangi, Hammer, & Evmenova, 2018; Satsangi, Hammer, & Hogan, 2018) investigated solving equations and inequalities in one variable including equations with coefficients represented by letters (CCSSM HSA‐REI.B.3). Two studies (Strickland & Maccini, 2013a, 2013b) focused on multiplying two linear expressions to produce a quadratic expression (CCSSM HSA‐REI.B.4.A).…”

“…The authors also conducted a 2‐year hand search (February 2017 to February 2019) of journals that present the most relevant empirical investigations in the field of special education and intervention research for this review. By this means, four additional articles (Bottge, Cohen, & Choi, 2018; Satsangi, Hammer, & Evmenova, 2018; Satsangi, Hammer, & Hogan, 2018, 2019) were identified. Of the 1,012 articles, 153 duplicates were excluded.…”

Teaching the partial products algorithm with the concrete representational abstract sequence and the strategic instruction model

“…The rationale for the CRA sequence is development of conceptual understanding of numbers and operations. Research shows that CRA instruction is effective in teaching complex computation such as addition with regrouping (Bouck, Park, Shurr, Bassette, & Whorley, 2018; Miller & Kaffar, 2011), subtraction with regrouping (Bouck, Chamberlain, & Park, 2017; Flores & Hinton, 2019; Mancl, Miller, & Kennedy, 2012), and algebra (Satsangi, Hammer, & Hogan, 2018; Witzel, 2005; Witzel, Mercer & Miller, 2003). CRA computation interventions included the Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) to assist in developing procedural knowledge, but only after students achieve conceptual understanding.…”