See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325390263

Effects of Direct-Instruction (DISTAR) on Improvement of Mathematics in

Student with Learning Disabilities

Article · May 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 578

4 authors, including:

Bagher GHobari Bonab Hamid Alizadeh

school of psychology and education Allameh Tabataba'i University
132 PUBLICATIONS   533 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   207 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Fatimah Nosrati
University of Tehran
28 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Meaning-making coping View project

‫ ﺻﻼﺣﯿﺖﻫﺎی ﺣﺮﻓﻪای ﻣﺪﯾﺮان ﻣﺪارس‬View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fatimah Nosrati on 31 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
International Conference of Modern Research in Humanities (Aug 2014): 30-36
Tehran- Iran
www.amiemt-journal.com

EFFECTS OF DIRECTINSTRUCTION (DISTAR)

ONIMPROVEMENT OF MATHEMATICS IN STUDENTS WITH
LEARNING DISABILITIES
Bagher GHOBARI BONAB,
associate professor of psychology and education of exceptional children at Tehran University, Iran
bghobari@ut.ac.ir
Hamid ALIZADEH,
associate professor of psychology and education of exceptional children at Tabatabaee University, Iran
H.alizadeh@atu.ac.ir
Fatimah NOSRATI,
Assistant professor of psychology and education of exceptional children at Tehran University, Iran
fnosrati@ut.ac.ir
Tayyebeh GOLESTANI
MA in psychology and education of exceptional children

ABSTRACT

Many studies have demonstrated the efficacy of Direct Instruction in various

academic fields. The main characteristic of this approach is emphasis on a perfectly
straightforward, successive Instruction with quick steps and empirical experiences
which is taught by the teacher. DirectInstruction means breaking the complex task
into its constituent components, and also training and organizing these components.
This study aims at examining the efficacy ofDirectInstruction approach (DISTAR)
on improvement of mathematics in students with learning disabilities. In the present
study, A-B single subject design was used with follow-up phase. In order to arrive
at the goal of the study, researchers selected three students at age range of 8 to 10 in
the city of Ferdows. Wechsler intelligence scale for children was used to measure
the variables in order to determine intellectual ability of children and also identify
the students with learning disabilities, and teacher-made tests were used as a base
line to evaluate input behaviour of students in math. Teacher-made test was
implemented as pre-test and post-test, and follow-up phase was run after 14, 21,25 days sequentially, and the scores of
each three stages were recorded on a diagram and its graph was drawn. The results showed that all three tests in
intervention phase of experimental operation in comparison to baseline, had considerable improvements, and maintained a
fairly high degree of learning in follow-up phase.

Keywords:DirectInstruction, Learning Disabilities, Dyscalculia, Students.

1.INTRODUCTION

Inability in learning is a problem which affects the inability of child in receiving, processing, analyzing or
storing information. This inability can make reading, writing, spelling or solving mathematics questions
difficult for the child (Gresten, Jordan and Flojo, 2005).
Students with learning disabilities learn very slowly, while other students have better educational status and feel
less humiliated and they don't have aversion to school and lessons. The parents of students with learning
disabilities are often ignorant of the causes of this inability, and this arises more problems and by exposing
pressures on their child, they multiply the difficulties (Kakavand&Ahadi, 2009).
DirectInstruction with a behavioural approach has special characteristics (clear goals, precise organization,
short steps, presentation of easy to difficult subjects, advanced-organizer, organized and guided practices,
repetitive evaluation), which is implemented as an affective and adequate approach in helping students with
learning disabilities. Bursuck and Damer (2007) define the components of DirectInstruction as
'DirectInstruction is an explicit teaching, Direct teaching of skills and methods, organized and systematic

30
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

training during teaching, which clearly selects a set of skills and then, organizes useful skills in a logical manner
for Instruction'.
This approach requires more plans which are provided by teachers, and if applied effectively, it can be used
extensively for transferring skills from the learned subjects to new ones (Strickland &Maccini, 2010).
In the research's review of literature on the effectiveness of DirectInstruction, Suzan, Barbara and John (2005),
Adams and Carnine (2003) revealed that in comparison to other educational programs, DirectInstruction is
more effective in the improvement of learners with special learning disabilities. Watkins and Slowcam (2004),
Carnine, Silbert, Kame and Traver (2004), have found that, with regard to the results of experimental studies,
DirectInstruction is more approved and supported than any other training program. Thus, DirectInstruction is
undoubtedly is the most useful educational program for students who are at risk of educational failure or on the
other hand, those who need special trainings. Many researches have been done on the efficacy of this approach
in general and special training, and each research represents the success of this approach. Harskamp and Suhre
(2006), showed the effects of computerized DirectInstruction programs in comparison to structural computer
program on high school math, which results approved the DirectInstruction more noticeably. Herbst (2005) also
assessed the efficacy of DirectInstruction in mathematics of students with behavioral-emotional problems, and
found that this approach can overcome the mathematic problems of these students.
The efficacy of DirectInstruction is approved on reading and mathematics of 55 students with cerebral palsy in
14.5 to 16.5 range of age and average IQ of 71.25 (Humphries, Neufeld, Johnson, Engels and MacKay, 2005).
Herbst (2005), evaluated the effectiveness of DirectInstruction on math of 10 students with emotional-
behavioral problems, and concluded that this approach is suitable for overcoming mathematic problems.
In a study Kroesbergen and Van Luit (2005) compared DirectInstruction with guided training in mathematics
on 69 students with mild mental retardation, and found that the efficacy of DirectInstruction is higher than
guided training. Kroesbergen, also, conducted a meta-analysis study from 58 studies on the intervention of
mathematics in students with peculiar need at elementary level, and revealed that DirectInstruction and self-
examination are more effective than mediating strategies, and suggested that DirectInstruction in math skills
enjoys from strongest research supports.
In case of DirectInstruction, few studies have been conducted so far in Iran, from which one can address the
followings. Pirzadi et.al (2011), evaluated the effect of DirectInstruction on phonological awareness in reading
skill which was conducted on students with learning disabilities. Their results showed that DirectInstruction can
have positive effect on improving academic achievements.
Karimi (2010),compared the effectiveness of three training approaches, which were DirectInstruction,
phonological awareness and combined teaching, and involved in reducing the spelling problems of elementary
students and also editing plans. The results of this study showed that DirectInstruction, phonological awareness
and combined teaching approaches, areall pretty effective and useful in solving spelling problems of elementary
students.
In another study, SharifiArdani (2010), evaluated the effects of DirectInstruction approach on learning math
concepts (addition, subtraction, multiplication and division) in students with math disabilities. The results
suggested that DirectInstruction approach is positively effective in children's learning math concepts.
Most of the researches have shown the efficacy of DirectInstruction in various academic fields. Among these,
Grussen (2004) suggested the improvement of high-risk students in reading, language and mathematics because
of using DirectInstruction. Kroesbergen (2003) also conducted a meta-analysis study from 58 studies on the
intervention of mathematics in students at elementary level with learning disabilities, and found that
DirectInstruction is the most suitable approach for basic mathematical skills. Since these students need step-by-
step and Direct training, task analysis and organized Instruction, DirectInstruction approach is a proper
approach in training these students (Kroesbergen&Van Luit, 2005). DirectInstruction means breaking a
complex task into its constituent components, and then training and organizing these components (Stine, Silbert
and Carnine, 1997). The main characteristics of this approach are emphasis on completely Direct, successive
with quick steps training along with empirical experiences, which are taught by the teacher
(Hallahan&Kaffman, 2003).
Although many studies on the DirectInstruction have been done outside of Iran, this paper tries to find a useful
approach for teaching math to these students (with math disabilities) through conducting a research with the
title of evaluating the efficacy of DirectInstruction on mathematical performance of students with learning
disabilities; with respect to different cultural and economical characteristics of Iran, this approach has not been
examined for students with math disabilities, and this paper intends to address this gap.

31
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

The present study intended to examine the following hypotheses:

Mathematical performance in students with math disabilities improves through using DirectInstruction.
The effects of DirectInstruction on improvement of math performance is different between two sexes.
This study aims at examining the effects of DirectInstruction (DISTAR) on improvement of mathematics in
students with learning disabilities.

2.METHODOLOGY

In the present study, A-B single subject design was used with a follow-up phase. In order to arrive at the goal of
the study, researchers selected three students at age range of 8 to 10 in the city of Ferdows.

2.1.HEASURES

Wechsler intelligence scale for children and teacher-made tests was used to measure the variables.
a) Wechsler intelligence scale: this scale was made by Wechsler in 1969 to measure children's IQ. On the
contrary to similar single scales, it is not based on age levels, but consists of sub-tests, whose provisions are
arranged according to difficulty. Each sub-test evaluates different capabilities, and presents the collection of the
whole intelligence. WISC scale, was revised andstandardized after 25 years after compilation in 1974, and the
revised Wechsler intelligence scale for children was named (WISC-R). This test includes 12 subtest, 2 tests of
which has a reserving aspect, and 6 tests are verbal and 6 tests are nonverbal. In order to determine the
reliability of the scale, reliability of re-assessment of tests and IQs and chanson reliability coefficient of tests of
(WISC-R) scale were examined, and it was found that the test is highly reliable. In order to evaluate the
reliability of re-assessment, 120 children, who were examined before, at 6-12 range of agewere selected, and
they were examined twice over 4 to 6 weeks. The reliability coefficient of the tests was variable between 0.44
to 0.94, except for two cases in which the reliability coefficient of the test of adapting symptoms and account
was lower than these values. In order to evaluate the chanson reliability of the scale, verbal and nonverbal tests
except for memory figures test, which is made of two distinct components, and symptoms matching test which
is a speed test, other tests are divided into even and odd sections and correlation coefficient of both sections was
determined. 252 were randomly selected from among 7 different age groups, and they were examined in 11
Spearman Brown tests between even and odd scores. The chanson reliability coefficient of tests is at 6-11 age
groups, which is significant in all cases. These variables are variable from 0.98 for feedback terms and
reinforcement up to 0.42 for account.
b) teacher-made test: this test is designed based on the content of math book of third and forth level of
elementary school for normal students. Content validity of test was determined by examining and comparing
test and book contents. Test validity was also confirmed by some experts and experienced specialists. Teacher-
made test consists of 20 questionsfor each concept, which was provided to students as pre-test and post-test, and
each question had a score, and total score were twenty.

3.FINDINGS

The results showed that all three tests in intervention phase of experimental operation in comparison to
baseline, had considerable improvements, and maintained a fairly high degree of learning in follow-up phase.

32
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

Table 1: improvement of subjects in pretest and post-test with follow-up test in short
Pre- Post- Follow-
raw lessons
test test up
Concept of
25% 90% 0.75
reading time
Concept of
First 20% 80% 70%
mass
subject
Concept of
25% 85% 70%
division
Measuring line
5% 90% 80%
segment
Concept of
30% 95% 85%
doubling
Isosceles and
Equilateral 15% 85% 75%
Second
triangles
subject
Concept of
25% 90% 60%
diameter
equality of
multiplication 0 85% 75%
and addition
Division with
0.31 85% 70%
remaining
test on
Third
correctness of 15% 85% 70%
subject
division
Division with
0 80% 65%
transfer
parallelogram 30% 90% 75%

Step A Step B
Scores Before Afterexperiment The following
operation al operation step
intervention intervention

Courses

Figure 1: subject A at third level of elementary school

Lessons guide
1- Reading time.
2- Concept of mass.
3- Concept of division.
4- Measuring line segment.

Subject A in teacher-made pre-test gained 5 score from 20 in case of the concept of reading, and correctly
answered 20% of questions, and this value indicated 90% of increase in post-test. After 2 weeks in the follow-
up phase, the subject gained the score of 15 and correctly answered to 75% of questions. In case of the concept
of mass, it correctly answered 20% of questions in pre-test, while it increased to 80% in post-test. In case of the
concept of division, the subject had 25% improvement, but in post-test correctly answered 85% of questions
with DirectInstruction, and in the follow-up test, it correctly answered 70% of questions after 18 days.

33
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

Step A Step B The

Before Afterexperimen following step
tal operation
Scores operation
intervention
intervention

Courses

Figure2: subject B at third level of elementary

Lessons guide:
1- Concept of doubling
2- Isosceles and Equilateral triangles
3- Concept of diameter
4- Equality of multiplication and addition

Subject B in teacher-made pre-test correctly answered 30% of questions in case of the concept of doubling,
which was increased to 90% after teaching in post-test phase. The subject got score 25 in follow-up level after
21 days, and answered 85% of questions correctly. In case of introducing Isosceles and Equilateral triangles, the
subject correctly answered 15% of questions in pre-test, while it increased up to 85% in post-test. In case of the
concept of diameter, the subject had 25% progress, but in post-test phase it could correctly answer 90% of
questions with DirectInstruction, and correctly answered 60% of questions in follow-up phase after 18 days.
Step A Step B
Before Afterexperim The following step
Scores operation ental operation
intervention intervention
n

Courses

Figure3: subject C at third level of elementary

Lessons guide
1- Division with remaining
2- Testing the correctness of division
3- Division with transfer
4- Parallelogram
34
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

Subject C in teacher-made pre-test on the concept of division with remaining correctly answered 35% of
questions, which increased to 80% in post-test phase. After 25 days in follow-up phase, it gained score 14 and
correctly answered 70% of questions. It could only correctly answer 15% of questions in pre-test on testing the
correctness of division, and in follow-up phase it could correctly answer 70% of questions. In pre-test, it
couldn't answer any question in case of the concept of division with transfer, while it increased to 80% in post-
test. In follow-up phase, 65% of questions were answered correctly. In case of introducing parallelogram, the
subject had 30% progress, but in post-test stage it could correctly answer 90% of questions with
DirectInstruction, and in follow-up test it correctly answered 75% of questions.

4.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

With regard to the methodology of the present study, it can be concluded that DirectInstruction is effective in
improving the students with math disabilities, and the results of this study is compatible with those of Maccini
et al. (2006), Kroesbergen (2003), Centeno (2005), Flores and Keylor (2006), Pirzadi et al. (2011). In a study
(2005), Centeno showed the efficacy of DirectInstruction on reducing the interruptions in the progress of
reading skills in elementary school students. Flores and Keylor (2006), evaluated the effects of
DirectInstruction on the successful performance in the topic of fraction in students who are at risk of academic
failureat secondary school, and the results revealed that the participation of students in this program caused
improvements in their skill. The results of the study which was conducted by Maccini et al. (2006) indicated
that one of the effective training approaches for students at high school with emotional and learning disabilities,
is DirectInstruction. Pirzadi et al. (2011), examined the effects of DirectInstruction on phonological awareness
in reading skill of students with learning disabilities. Their results showed that DirectInstruction is effective in
academic improvement of students.
The efficacy of this approach in children with cerebral palsy (Humphries et al., 2005), risky (Grussen, 2004),
normal but weak (Bar-cole, 2004 &Centeno, 2005) and normal students (Stones, Slavin&Famish, 1991
&Standish, 2005) was high. Since this approach differs from therapy-training intervention (Direct approach),
this approach is recommended to psychologists, consultants, teachers, parents and educational administrators
applying this approachto improve learning abilities of math in students.

REFERENCE

Pirzadi, H. et al. Effects of DirectInstruction of Phonological Awareness on the Improvement of Reading Skills in Students
with Reading Disabilities. Audiology, 21, 1, 2012.
Kakavand, A. Ahadi, H. 'Learning disabilities (from hypothesis to practice)' Tehran, Doran Publications, 2009.
SharifiArdani, A. 'the effect of DirectInstruction on learning math concepts for children with math disabilities', Tehran,
MA thesis, 2010.
Karimi, B. 'comparing the effectiveness of three training approaches, DirectInstruction, phonological awareness and
combined training on reducing spelling problems of elementary students as well as editing its plan', Tehran, MA thesis,
2010.
Adams, G&Carnine, D, DirectInstruction. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris & ,S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning
disabilities (pp. 403–416), New York: Guilford Press, 2003.
Stein M, Silbert J., and Carnine, D, Designing effective mathematics Instruction: A DirectInstruction approach, Upper
Saddle River NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1997.
Hallahan, D. P., and Kaffman, J. M,Exceptional Learners Instruction to Special Education, New York: Allyn and Bacon,
2003.
Watkins, C. L & ,.Slocum, T. A, The components of DirectInstruction.In N. E. Marchand- Martella, T. A. Slocum&R. C.
Martella (Eds.), Introduction to DirectInstruction. Boston: Pearson Education, 2004.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., Kame, E., &Traver, Sm, DirectInstruction reading (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson,
2004.
Susan G. M., Barbara B. L., & John K. B, DirectInstruction Revisited: A Key Model for Instructional Technology, ETR &
D, 53, 4, pp. 41–55 ISSN 1042–1629, 2005.
Bursuck, W. D., &Damer, M., Reading Instruction for students who are at risk or have disabilities, Boston, MA:
Pearson/Allyn& Bacon, 2007.
Centeno,B. P., Defeating the reading achievement gap at Farge elementary: to each encoding to his needs,
Dessertation Abstract International, 66 (6) 2082, 2005.
35
 Applied mathematics in Engineering, Management and Technology 2014
B. Ghorabi et al

Grossen, B., Success of a DirectInstruction Model at a Secondary-Level School with high-risk Students, Reading and
Writing Quarterly, 20 161-178, 2004.
Kroesbergen, E. H., Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs, Remedial and Special
Education, 24(2), 97-114, 2003.
Krosebergen, E., and Van Luit, J. E. H., Constructivist Mathematics Educations for Students with Mild Mind Retardation,
European, Journal of Special Needs Education, 20 (1) 07-116, 2005.
Maccini, P., Cagan, J. C., Mulcah, C. A., Leon, P. E., Math Instruction for committed youth Juvenile Correctional Schools,
The Journal of Correctional Education, 57 (3) 210-229, 2006.
Bar-cole, D. O., An evaluation of an intense summer reading intervention program, Dissertation Abstract International, 65,
4, 1315, 2004.
Gersten, R., Jordan, N. C., &Flojo, J. R., Early identification and interventions for students with mathematics difficulties,
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (4): 293-304, 2005.
Harskamp, E. G., & and Suhre, J. M., Improving mathematical problem solving: a computerized approach. Computers in
Human Behavior.v22 i5.801-815, 2006.
Herbst, M.H. Faciliting access to the general education mathematics curriculum for students with emotion/behavioral
disorders.Dissertation Abstract International, 65, 8, 2948, 2005.
Humphries, T., Neufeld, M., Johnson, C., Engels, K., & MacKay, R.A pilot study of the affect of DirectInstruction
programming on the academic performance of student with intractable epilepsy, Epilepcy&Behavoir.6 (3), 405-412, 2005.
Standish, L. G., The effective of collaborative strategies reading and DirectInstruction in persuasion on sixth-grade
student’s Persuasive writing and attitude. Dissertation Absract International, 66, 5, 1623, 2005.
Stevens, R. J., Slavin, R. E., & Famish, A. M., The effects of Cooperative Learning and DirectInstruction in reading
comprehension strategies on main idea identification, Journal of Educational Psychology, 83 (1), 8-16, 1991.
Strickland, T. K., Maccini, P., Strategies for teaching algebra to students with learning disabilities, Focus on Exceptional
Children, 34, 1-15, 2010.
Flores, M. M., and Kaylor, M., The effects of a DirectInstruction program on the fraction performance of middle school
students At-risk for failure in mathematics, Journal of Instruction psychology, 34, 84-94, 2007.

36

View publication stats