Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Learning Disabilities
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Simmonds, E. P.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Simmonds, E. P.M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Effectiveness of Two Methods for Teaching a Constraint-Seeking Questioning Strategy to Students with Learning Disabilities

Effie P.M. Simmonds

Effie P.M. Simmonds is assistant professor of education at the College ofStaten Island of the City University of New York. She earned her EdD in special education with specialization in learning disabilities from Teachers College, Columbia University, in 1986. Her research is focused on cognitive and metacognitive strategy instruction related to academic achievement in general and to reading comprehension in particular. Address: Effie P.M. Simmonds, The College of Staten Island/CUNY, 130 Stuyvesant PL, Staten Island, NY 10301.

This study investigated the relative effectiveness of two methods of teaching an efficient questioning strategy to students with learning disabilities. The methods compared were fa) cognitive modeling alone in the use of constraint-seeking questions, and (b) cognitive modeling and verbalization in the use of constraint-seeking questions, involving explicit and consistent instruction and feedback. Sixty subjects with learning disabilities were assigned randomly to one of these two conditions (n = 30 in each group). A pretreatment and posttreatment design was employed, with the criterion variable being number of questions required to obtain the correct answers to two 20 questions games. Results indicated that both groups showed significant reductions from pretreatment to posttreatment in the number of questions required. The two methods of instruction did not differ significantly in effectiveness.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 23, No. 4, 229-233 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949002300405
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?