Effects of two methods of teaching multiplication to students with learning disabilities

Many students with learning disabilities are not proficient in basic math computation such as basic multiplication (Cawley & Miller, 1989; Maccini & Hughes, 1997). This lack of fluency interferes with mathematical achievement, especially for older students (Cawley, Parmar, Yan, & Miller, 1996; Maccini & Gagnon, 2000). A review of the intervention literature in the area of teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities was conducted. The results were grouped according to two theoretical models of learning, behavioral and information processing models. Many of the instructional methods for teaching basic multiplication to students with learning disabilities were successful regardless of their theoretical explanations. Based on the review of the literature, it is not known whether there is a difference between behavioral methods and information processing methods with regard to efficacy or efficiency. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the difference between one of each type of method, constant time delay and strategic instruction.;Middle school students with learning disabilities learned basic multiplication facts through two different instructional methods, constant time delay and strategic instruction. A multiple probe across students design with embedded changing conditions was employed to investigate whether one of the two methods was more effective or efficient with regard to skill acquisition, maintenance, and generalization. A nonparametric statistical test was also employed to compare the two methods. Data were collected through 1-minute fluency probes in order to measure the students' acquisition and maintenance of multiplication skills. Generalization of multiplication skills to untaught multiplication facts was measured using 1-minute probes and untimed probes. With regard to skill acquisition, no consistent difference between the two methods was found. However, the findings suggest that strategic instruction is more effective than constant time delay with regard to skill maintenance and generalization.