Date of Award

1981

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Abstract

This study had the purpose of comparing the effects of two approaches in teaching mathematics to secondary special education students. The study attempted to answer the following questions: (1) Were there significant differences between group means of mathematics achievement test scores for students in a diagnostic-prescriptive mathematics program compared to students using programmed mathematics? and (2) Were there significant differences between group means of self-concept scores for students in a diagnostic-prescriptive program compared to students using programmed mathematics? Twenty-four secondary special education students enrolled at the East Baton Rouge Evaluation and Vocational Center were the subjects in this study. The study consisted to the following treatment conditions: (1) Adston Mathematics Skills Series, Working with Whole Numbers, and (2) Ken Cook Mark 9 Teaching Machines with mathematics slides and tapes. A control group received no special mathematics. Thirty-eight subjects were administered the Key Math Diagnostic Arithmetic Test and Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale. After pretests were completed, the treatment conditions (Adston and Ken Cook materials) were administered for approximately 20 minutes per school day for 12 weeks. Due to individual differences in mathematical ability some subjects finished the treatment condition before 12 weeks. After the treatment conditions were completed posttests were administered to 24 subjects remaining from the original 38. Pretests and posttests scores were analyzed by analysis of covariance to determine if significant differences existed among group means of mathematics and self-concept scores. The following conclusions were reached from the analysis: (1) The results were significant between the adjusted group means on the addition subtest of the Key Math Diagnostic Arithmetic Test; both the Adston and Ken Cook materials had significantly greater gains when compared to the Control group; (2) the Adston group displayed significant gains for the subtraction subtest on the Key Math compared to the Control and Ken Cook groups; (3) The Adston group had significant gains on the multiplication subtest of the Key Math compared to the Control group; and (4) There were no significant differences on the Key Math division subtest or the Piers-Harris Children's Self Concept scores. General conclusions from the study were the following: (1) A diagnostic-prescriptive mathematics instrument such as the Adston can significantly aid the teacher and student; and (2) Method of teaching mathematics did not significantly affect the secondary special education student's self-concept.

Pages

56

Share

COinS