0% found this document useful (0 votes)
73 views10 pages

Analysis

This document summarizes research analyzing the differences in high school course-taking patterns between students with learning disabilities and those without. It finds that students with learning disabilities take fewer math and science courses, more non-academic electives, and perform below their peers without disabilities in these subjects. The research aims to determine how non-core course-taking relates to STEM preparation and whether any effects differ between students with and without learning disabilities. It uses a national dataset of high school students to analyze course credits and identify relationships between course types.

Uploaded by

api-295463484
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
73 views10 pages

Analysis

This document summarizes research analyzing the differences in high school course-taking patterns between students with learning disabilities and those without. It finds that students with learning disabilities take fewer math and science courses, more non-academic electives, and perform below their peers without disabilities in these subjects. The research aims to determine how non-core course-taking relates to STEM preparation and whether any effects differ between students with and without learning disabilities. It uses a national dataset of high school students to analyze course credits and identify relationships between course types.

Uploaded by

api-295463484
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 10

Scientifically

Based Research
Article Analysis
Adam T. Wasilko

Background Information
Article selected: Technology and Communications Coursework:
Facilitating the Progression of Students with Learning Disabilities
Through High School Science and Math Coursework
Journal of Special Education Technology, 2010.

Students with identified learning disabilities (LD) have


demonstrated lower achievement in math and science
subject areas.
Also noted, students that have been identified with LD
also typically take more non-academic/vocational
classes

Background Information
67% of students with disabilities perform below basic proficiency on
the eighth grade National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) math test in contrast to 26% of students without disabilities
Students with LD may experience lower levels of STEM
achievement because of a variety of cognitive impediments,
including:
difficulties paying attention for sustained periods of time calculating
basic math function
retaining and retrieving information by memory
using problem-solving strategies
Generalizing using abstract algebraic reasoning

Co-occurring psychosocial and social factors also exist.


They include lower levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy, a lack of
social skills, and reduced motivation

Background Information
Despite the increasing academic emphasis within high
schools, non-core coursework continues to account for
20% of all high school course taking
Students with disabilities have traditionally been
disproportionately represented in non-core coursework.

Non-special needs students take an average of 3.7


noncore credits and students with disabilities taking an
average of 5.6 non-core credits by the end of high school

Research Questions
1 . How does the non-core, science, and math high school course
taking of students identified with LD compare to those of students
who are not identified with LD?
2. Which types of non-core coursework, if any, are positively
associated with higher levels of science and math course taking?
3. Is any effect on STEM preparation experienced by students who
are identified with LD comparable to that which is experienced by
students who are not identified with LD?

Methodology
The Education Longitudinal Study (ELS) of 2002, a large national
dataset of both regular and special education students who were in
the tenth grade during 2002 was utilized for this study.
ELS was conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics
(NOES), a division of the U.S. Department of Education.
The survey sampled 16,373 spring term tenth graders enrolled in
approximately 750 high schools in 2002.
We utilized measures from the student surveys (2002, 2004) and the
parent survey (2002), as well as data from the students' high school
transcripts.

Methodology
ELS is an ideal dataset for this study for several reasons.
There are very few large datasets with measures of both disability and
socio-demographic characteristics (Ong-Dean, 2006).
In contrast to ELS, the federal datasets that are focused specifically
on special education do not include peers who are not in special
education as a base of comparison.
ELS continues to conduct surveys with students who have dropped
out.
Because of their higher drop out rates, students with LD would
experience greater rates of attrition from datasets that do not include
dropouts.

Data Analysis
All course taking was measured through credits earned
rather than credits attempted.
NCES (National Center for Education Statistics)
standardizes the school reports of credits with Carnegie
credits, which are standard units of measurement that
represent the completion of a secondary-level course that
meets one period per day for one year.
For example, 0.5 would generally be an indication of a
semester-long course that met one period every day.

Results
At the baseline, these analyses established that students identified with
LD had markedly lower STEM course attainment than students who
were not identified.
They also took relatively more credits in non-core coursework and fewer
credits in the types of non-core coursework positively associated with
STEM outcomes.

Findings from the present study suggest that educators and schools can
begin to address these inequities through course placement.
The persistent and sizeable gaps in STEM attainment between students
who were and were not identified with LD, regardless of technology and
communications credit accumulation, demonstrate the relevance of
exploring students' course taking patterns

You might also like