Study One
Subjects and Setting
During a two-year span, students who received educational services
through a private agency were interviewed to ascertain the various
types of classroom assignments the students were expected to complete.
A total of 100 students were interviewed and the assignments were
assigned to categories. The students were from a range of school
situations involving both public and private schools in a medium-sized
city and its surrounding counties.
Results
The following list of classroom-related tasks was compiled:
1. Textbook reading.
2. Notetaking.
3. Oral reports.
4. Essay writing.
5. Written assignments.
6. Memorization.
7. Development of programs to control behavior.
8. Outlining.
9. Reading.
10. Test-taking (short answer, multiple choice, true-false, fill-in.
matching, essay).
11. Spelling.
12. Proofing.
13. Math problems.
Study Two
Subjects and Setting
A total of 71 students served as the sample population for this
study on the use of an organized strategy for memorization. The
students were from a wide variety of schools representing both
public and private schools. IQ tests indicated that abilities
ranged from low average to high average. The age range was from
12 to 17 years.
Method
The students were given five minutes to memorize a list of 30
words. After the five minutes elapsed, the students were requested
to write down all the words they could remember. They were then
instructed to count the number of words and put the number at
the top of the page.
The students were then taught a simple organization strategy
that utilized categorization. Words such as house, dog and cat
were used to provide a framework to attach other words such as
yard, bone and string so that the student could use association
to increase memorization and retrieval. There were five categories
of words and four word pairs that were used to organize thirty
words to be learned. The students were not given any additional
time to study the words and a time delay of five minutes was imposed
by discussing hobbies. The students were then asked to write down
all the words they could remember.
Results
The number of words retrieved on the initial try ranged from
2 to 30 words. The mean number of words was 13 prior to the strategy
training. The mean number of words when using the organizational
strategy increased to 24 and ranged from 17 to 30.
Subjects and Setting
The setting was a small classroom located in a multi-disciplinary
agency in a medium-sized city. No affiliation or contact was made
with any of the schools represented by students in the sample;
thus, the setting was quite isolated from the variety of public
and private schools attended by the sample students.
Students in the sample population were recommended to participate
in learning strategy groups for a period of six weeks. The basic
criteria for entry into a group was the identification of an attention
problem by a psychologist in combination with underachievement
as reflected by the student's school report card. All members
of the sample were assigned to groups according to age and grade
level. The groups were either middle school or high school populations
with an overall age range from 12 years, 10 months to 17 years,
8 months. The IQ ranged from low average to high average. Group
size was limited to 5 students per group. Any student who was
receiving additional tutoring or services was excluded from the
sample.
Method
The typical classroom tasks required of students from the first
study served as a framework for the development of a collection
of study strategies to improve classroom performance. A strategy
was developed for each type of learning task which resulted in
a total of 20 strategies that were taught to students under the
title of "Independent Strategies for Efficient Study." For six
weeks, the groups met once a week with the instructor. Each session
ran for one and a half hours. The following schedule was followed
for each group:
Session 1 - Association for Memory, Systematic Study System,
Self-graphing of Grades, Notebook Organization.
Session 2 - Streamlined Notetaking, Notetaking from Written Material,
Time Management.
Session 3 - Wheels for Reading, Pictorials, Diagrams, Charts
for Organization.
Session 4 - Wheels for Writing, Spelling, Proofing.
Session 5 - Wheels for Literature, Self-monitoring of Behavior,
Self-talk, Imagery, Graphing of Behaviors, Test-taking.
Session 6 - Review of the 20 strategies.
The 20 strategies and the generalization exercise are detailed
in this book so the descriptions will not be repeated here. Refer
to the text for detailed descriptions of the strategies and the
generalization procedure. Any absences were made up during individual
sessions so that all the students completed the training in all
20 strategies.
Dependent Measures
Two measures were selected to measure student progress. First,
student grades before and after strategy training were used to
assess academic progress as well as the generalization of the
strategies. Though the measure of grades is not a pure measure
free of contaminating factors, grades do serve as the most commonly
accepted measure of a student's academic progress. Therefore,
the grades were selected as the primary dependent measure to assess
academic progress in the classroom.
Only content area courses such as history, science, psychology,
sociology and English were included in the study. Math grades,
physical education grades, and band/chorus grades were excluded.
A second dependent measure consisted of a phone contact to each
student's parents to assess the student's improvement and use
of the strategies. Parental responses were categorized as positive
or negative. Positive statements were limited to statements that
indicated improvement in schoolwork. Negative statements included
all other responses such as the parent not being sure or not knowing
if improvement had taken place. The responses were judged by two
independent raters using the "improvement" or "other" criteria
for judgement.
Results
A comparison was made using the direct-difference method to assess
the difference between the grades received prior to strategy training
and after strategy training. The comparison revealed a highly
significant increase in student grades after six weeks of strategy
training (N=67, t=-6.54, p<.001). The direct-difference method
was chosen to serve as the statistical procedure for a before-after
design to accommodate correlated samples.
Descriptive data was tabulated in addition to the statistical
analysis. Changes in grades are listed below:
| Increase of 1 letter grade |
21 |
| Increase of 2 letter grades |
16 |
| Increase of 3 letter grades |
5 |
| Remained the same |
19 |
| Decreased 1 letter grade |
6 |
Numerical measures of student averages based on a five point
(A=5, B=4, C=3, D=2, F=1) scale were also computed to assess individual
students gains:
| |
Pre |
Post |
| 1. |
2.50 |
3.50 |
| 2. |
1.00 |
3.00 |
| 3. |
4.00 |
4.00 |
| 4. |
2.75 |
3.25 |
| 5. |
2.00 |
3.25 |
| 6. |
2.00 |
3.25 |
| 7. |
2.25 |
3.00 |
| 8. |
2.52 |
2.50 |
| 9. |
2.00 |
2.50 |
| 10. |
1.75 |
2.75 |
| 11. |
1.67 |
2.67 |
| 12. |
1.67 |
3.00 |
| 13. |
1.80 |
3.00 |
| 14. |
2.00 |
2.75 |
| 15. |
2.50 |
4.00 |
| 16. |
2.30 |
3.00 |
| 17. |
1.25 |
3.25 |
| 18. |
1.00 |
2.00 |
| 19. |
3.00 |
3.00 |
| 20. |
3.00 |
4.00 |
| |
|
|
| Mean |
2.10 |
3.08 |
The cumulative scores resulted in a mean increase of .98.
Parent contacts resulted in 26 comments being deemed positive
and 4 comments being designated as negative or not sure. Inter-rater
reliability was 100%.
Discussion
The results indicated that grades improved significantly after
six weeks of instruction using the strategies outlined in this
book. The effectiveness of this strategy training package is supported
by the results of this study; however, the data also reflects
the generalization of the use of the strategies which is as important
as the effectiveness of the strategy training. Further research
needs to address the impact of the individual strategies on specific
academic areas but the results of this study indicate that the
learning strategy course described in this book has been shown
empirically to result in significant improvement in academic progress
as measured by classroom grades.
Research on Core Strategy Training
Method
Subjects and Setting
Three high school students receiving services as students with
learning disabilities in a large public school system were the
participants in the study. All three students were identified
through the use of ability/achievement discrepancies as well as
specific processing weaknesses. The ability range was from low
average to average. The students were in the Resource Program
as well as mainstream classes but were receiving no services directly
related to their mainstream classes. The students were nominated
by their teacher as students who were struggling with academic
achievement and who needed help with their performance in the
regular classroom.
Research Design
A multiple baseline design was used to measure the changes in
performance through the use of classroom grades. Mainstream classroom
teachers were not told about the intervention but were asked to
provide two grades per week that resulted from quizzes or tests.
Homework grades were not included. The teachers simply wrote down
the student's grades on a form that was collected by the school
secretary at the end of each week. The grades were used as the
dependent variable.
Procedures
Grades were collected for all students at the beginning of the
second semester. The grades were collected over February, March,
April and May with some interruptions because of Easter vacation,
a snow day and teacher workdays. The teachers were requested to
participate in the study by the special education teacher and
were asked to hand in the grades to a spot on the secretary's
desk at the end of each week. There was no contact between the
teachers and the strategy trainer. The strategy training took
place over weekends and not on school grounds so teachers would
not know when the training occurred. At different intervals, the
subjects were trained to use selected strategies from the course
called "Independent Strategies for Efficient Study".
Results
The graphs representing student performance before and after
strategy training intervention depict significant improvement
in academic performance after the organizational strategy training
intervention.
| Student 1 |
 |
| Student 2 |
 |
| Student 3 |
 |
| Student 3 |
 |