Abstract:
Instructional Strategies for Teaching Pre-Algebra
to a Diverse Group of Learners
Planning effective instruction for a classroom full of learners demands that the
educator know what works and more importantly what works better for the group of
people residing in the educator's classroom today. This action research study tested the
efficacy of using the full compliment of assessments included in the curriculum
adoption at the researchers school and that of guided note taking. Each strategy was
implemented in its own separate unit of a pre-algebra class.
The researcher used student growth, which was determined by the difference
observed between a student's pre-test percentage score and their final unit test
percentage score, as the metric by which to evaluate each strategies efficacy.
Measurable growth was observed with both strategies. The All Assessments strategy
showed greater and more consistent growth among learners than that which was
observed during the Notes strategy. These findings indicate that more research is
needed on the effectiveness of using assessments for learning and a need for further
study to evaluate the efficacy of guided note taking. Findings in this study should be
considered as illuminating but not conclusive as the sample used is not generalizable.
Robert Ojeda
May, 2010
Ojeda
1
Instructional Strategies for Teaching Pre-Algebra
to a Diverse Group of Learners
by
Robert Ojeda
A project
submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Teaching
Brandman University, Visalia
May, 2010
Ojeda
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. The Problem ......................................................................... 4
Purpose of Study ...................................................................................... 5
Definition of Terms .................................................................................. 5
Research Questions.................................................................................. 5
II. Literature Review ............................................................... 6
III. METHODOLOGY .............................................................. 11
Strategy 1: All Assessments with Second Chance ...................................12
Strategy 2: All Assessments, Summarizing and Note Taking ................12
Data Collection and Recording ...............................................................13
IV. Study Results .................................................................... 13
Figure 1 All Assessments Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage
Scores...................................................................................................14
Figure 2 Notes Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage Scores.......15
Figure 3 All Assessment % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final
Test.......................................................................................................16
Figure 4 Notes % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test ............17
Figure 5 All Assessments and Notes Growth Comparison ................ 18
V. Conclusions ........................................................................18
VI. Concerns and Limitations .................................................19
REFERENCES......................................................................... 21
Ojeda
3
I. The Problem
Today's classroom is a diverse place where students from a myriad of backgrounds
and abilities are brought together with the expressed purpose of developing knowledge
and skills that will assist students in growing as individuals while preparing them for the
next level in their academic lives. The classroom where this study took place embodies
these conditions and strives towards these intentions. To effectively realize success as
measured by today's formal assessments this researcher recognizes the need to find,
specialize and implement a system of instructional strategies which will help assure that
each of these groups of learners are engaged, challenged and trained to use their skills
and knowledge to any challenge life throws at them.
The students comprising the sample in this study class are energetic, curious and
reside in a supportive and peaceful mountain community. In pre-algebra the half are
performing at grade level with about 25% below and about 25% or so above. Are there
ways challenge each learner and teach them in a way that best meets their needs while
doing so for all learners? Are there instructional strategies that could be implemented
that would yield better results for more students? Can this be accomplished within the
confines of the time currently used to plan? A safe assumption is that there is likely to
be many permutations of strategies that can be implemented in this classroom that will
yield a different result as represented by student performance on chapter tests. The
purpose of this action research study will be to evaluate the specific effectiveness of
several strategies as used by this researcher in this classroom.
The study sample of students are distributed by their performance on the 2009
California Standards Test for Math as, Advanced 24%, Proficient 29%, Basic 41%, Below
Basic 6%, Far Below Basic 0% (CST Report, 2009). It has been observed by the
researcher that this group of students are generally encouraged to keep up with their
Ojeda
4
academic work. The group is comprised of fifteen students, most of whom have been in
the same class together for the duration of their school years.
Finding the right strategies for todays students is important, but so is developing
strategies that can be used as a base program from which to specialize for the next year's
students who will come with unique instructional requirements.
Purpose of Study
This action research study sought to locate and evaluate instructional strategies for
use in teaching pre-algebra to a specific group of seventh grade students. The purpose
for doing so was to improve the effectiveness of instruction as determined by
measurable student growth observed during a series of instructional units.
Definition of Terms
In this study I will be using the term "self-contained" which is define as a group of
students who are taught all core academic subjects, physical education and art by the
same teacher. When referring to the subject I will at time use the term "diverse
population" when doing so I am referring to the distribution of math scores as reported
by the 2009 CST test and formative assessments administered by this groups regular
school teacher, myself. The abbreviation CST stands for the California Standards Tests.
The term STAR refers to the California's Standardized Testing and Reporting.
Research Questions
What strategies can I use in my self-contained classroom during math that will allow
me to meet the needs of my advanced, grade level and low performing students? Can an
improvement in student scores on summative assessments be accomplished without
Ojeda
5
significantly increasing planning time? Which strategy or combinations of strategies
when used result in an improvement in the consistency and quantity of growth each
student experiences as measured by comparing a unit's pre-assessment and the unit's
summative assessment?
II. Literature Review
A person's ability to reflect on his/her work is important for the process of learning to
be successful. McMillan and Hearn explain, "Evaluating what they learned, what they
still need to work on, and how they can get there can all support deeper understanding
rather than superficial knowledge" (2008). Reflection can take many forms including,
students grading their own assessments which are then used to guide them in their
learning. To be effective reflection must include opportunity to improve performance
and new opportunities to demonstrate learning and skill development.
Formative assessment can provide valuable information students need. As stated by
Campos and O'Hern, "feedback from... assessments can be used to help students with
goal setting. This allows the students to take responsibility for their learning and
become more independent learners" (Campos, 2007). Developing students into self-
motivated learners likely requires shifting the reins of their learning into student hands.
Access to control over their learning appears to motivate personal responsibility and a
genuine desire to improve.
Providing feedback through frequent assessment can influence learning and
achievement. Evertson and Neal discuss the use of assessment, "ongoing formative
assessment [is] a means for determining what [has] been learned and what else [is]
needed... Although often neglected in U.S. classrooms, there is considerable evidence
that formative assessment is an essential component of classroom work that
facilitates learning and can substantially raise student achievement" (2006). Students
Ojeda
6
who receive regular and specific feedback in the form of formative assessment should
score higher than when formative assessment is largely absent.
Intrinsic motivation is key to success. The road to intrinsic motivation requires
thoughtful planning and experimentation as Oginsky recalls, "even through research
supports and I believe, that non-controlling, positive feedback leads to a positive
classroom environment, and thus to an increase in intrinsic motivation, increasing
positive non-controlling feedback to students did not increase intrinsic motivation in
this classroom study" (2003). The group who are being taught must be carefully
considered when determining what type of feedback will aid them in developing their
own internal motivation for learning.
The objective of assessment must be consistent with the nature of it's implementation,
"the goals for developing diagnostic item models for formative assessment are
quite different from... [research] goals... First, we are less concerned with generating
instances with psychometric parameters that can be predicted very accurately, and more
concerned with generating instances that consistently measure patterns
of understanding with accuracy sufficient to focus instruction" (Graf, 2009). Formative
assessment that guides instruction must be constructed and evaluated so as to provide
the information that will aid in planning effective instruction in addition to supporting
feedback for students.
When construction assessment which will determine the efficacy of certain strategies
it is necessary to determine the appropriateness of the assessemnt choice. "Often the
instruction in the classroom is not geared toward the same objectives as those measured
on the assessment, or the assessment may, in fact, fail to provide information about
student's strengths and weaknesses as real targets for further instruction" (McDivitt,
2003). What is assessed is what should be instructed or the results cannot be trusted as
being the results of instruction, rather the product of other means.
Ojeda
7
Learning can occur in two phases, encoding/writing and external storage/studying,
when notes are involved as a tool for recording new information and during the process
of reviewing those notes prior to an assessment. In a study examining the efficacy of
students copy and pasting notes from internet sources Igo, Bruning and Riccomini
explain that, "students might not learn much during the encoding phase if they do not
engage in deep mental processes as they take notes... in the external storage phase of
note learning, students learn as they study a set of notes that already have been created"
(Igo, 2009). It is important that when notes are used as a tool for study that they should
be created carefully so as to assure their legibility and accuracy. One of the concerns the
study raised was that when students reviewed using their own hand created notes they
often reinforced errors and omissions that were recorded or missed in the encoding
phase.
Benefits in performance can possibly be realized if students are guided in how to
choose items to include while note taking. Igo suggests that educators, "teach students
how to evaluate which ideas to include in their notes, [as it] could have positive
consequences for both the encoding and the external storage phases of note learning"
(Igo, 2009). If taught to strategically consider the content they include in their notes,
students should benefit by having both less to study which will be more time and energy
efficient and the information they will be reviewing will be of a higher quality.
In a study by Neil Toporski and Tim Foley the need for a streamlined interactive
approach is indicated. The researcher studied the unique needs of the modern distance
education class setting. In this report it was explained that there exists a trend towards
providing "theatrical" and "diverse... presentation methods." The authors list strategies
formulated during the study that promote a successful schooling experience, they,
"make it interactive,... keep it engaging and motivating,... put things in context,...
maintain diversity,... use collaborative strategies,... reduce cognitive Load,... [and]
provide adequate scaffolding" (Toporski, 2004). Mr. Toporski and Mr. Foley's
Ojeda
8
conclusion validates the conclusions of similar studies that a more effective classroom
can be created in the physical space of a classroom or within the e-classroom by using
differentiated approaches that stimulate the many people take in new information.
Katherine Gibson studied how teachers perceive strategy based reading instruction
and its affect on comprehension. Her study was based on a small sample of teachers
who had a positive attitude going into the study about using strategy based reading. She
discovered that, "[teachers] surveyed have positive feelings towards strategy based
reading instruction... [and] find strategy based reading instruction an effective way to
improve reading comprehension," (Gibson, 2009). Ms. Gibson's study supports the idea
that attitude can influence success.
In his article in Education Leadership Using Data to Improve Student Achievement -
How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning, Thomas Guskey suggests giving
students the opportunity to improve their performance on assessments through a
second chance (Guskey, 2003). This researcher is curious if modifying the current
method of assessment to include several "chances" to hit the mark will yield higher
scores on these assessments overall.
In Robert J. Marzano's article in Educational Leadership What Works in Schools he
reports study results that show a average 34 point percentile gain and a 0.50 standard
deviation from the mean for a subject who uses the strategy of note taking and
summarizing (Marzano, 2003). In this study I will evaluate the effectiveness of, "asking
students to generate verbal summaries, asking students to generate written
summaries,... asking students to revise their notes, and/or correcting errors and adding
information" (Marzano, 2003). Specific importance seems to reside in the retooling of
notes after first taking them. They should be regarded as a malleable model which
represents the learners current understanding of and needs for the focus content.
The literature concerning differentiating instruction calls for many approaches,
attitudes and methods of implementation. Some have advocated for diving in where the
Ojeda
9
whole system is transformed rapidly, while many more have called for a gradual
adoption process with a long term more is better philosophy. Sondergeld and Shultz
advise: "use content you feel comfortable teaching; do not attempt to differentiate every
lesson you teach—you will get frustrated and feel burnt out; begin slowly, with maybe
only one or two differentiated units a year; invite parents or classroom aides into the
classroom to assist with" (Sondergeld, 2008). Change in the classroom routine and
lesson design should be gradual so as to maintain the energy and vigor of learners as
well as educators.
Self evaluation is key to understanding what is working and what can be improved.
Friend and Pope outline what each teacher needs to focus on in and some simple
guidelines for success, "First, sometimes the most successful way to go about changing is
to do so in small increments... Second, find colleagues with whom to share your efforts...
Third, set goals for yourself and celebrate when you accomplish them... Finally,
remember that working on differentiation is a clear example of lifelong learning,"
(Friend, 2005). This descriptive report reinforces what has been stated by the Center
for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.
The basic philosophical orientation of the educator is important to understanding
the expected response from students as initiated by the nature of the relationship
between the student and educator. In "Theories of Intelligence, Learning and
Motivation as a Basic Educational Praxis," Steven Van Hook examines the nature of this
relationship. The term "andragogy" is used to describe the paradigm shift that is and
must happen in education. Whereby "pedagogy" is rooted in the concept of the teacher
guiding the child in learning, andragogy instead views the learner in terms of
participating in their own self-actualized learning experience (Van Hook, 2008). This
calls to mind the concept of "ownership" often used to describe when students are
observed applying the concepts they have learned in new novel ways.
Ojeda
10
Summary and note taking when properly executed require extracting the essence of
the information being studied. Marzano explains, "students must analyze the
information in depth... in order to decide what information is important to make notes
about and information that is not, students must be able to mentally sift through and
synthesize information" (Marzano, 2000). An ongoing use of note taking as a regular
component of learning will likely result in the development of students abilities to pick
out the information they will most likely need to know for later use. Motivating students
to use this strategy to in a meaningful way might be accomplished by allowing the use of
student generated notes during assessment tasks.
III. METHODOLOGY
Each strategy selected for evaluation in this study was implemented in this
researchers classroom for two weeks in the following manner. Each new strategy was
isolated from influence by the other strategies during evaluation to the degree practical
in this real classroom environment. Students were instructed using in the researcher's
normal teaching style that included working problems as a group until it was clear to the
researcher that the majority of students were able to continue independently. At this
point instruction continued on a case by case basis as the need presented itself. This
was determined through teacher observation or through the direct request of students.
Efforts were taken to maintain a consistency of instruction during each strategy
evaluation. Before beginning instruction on the unit's lessons a pretest was
administered. During the course of the unit, quizzes were administered. The number of
quizzes was determined by the strategy being evaluated. Each quiz was given the
afternoon the day reteaching for the lesson being quizzed had been completed. A mid-
chapter quiz was given after the sixth or seventh unit lesson had been corrected and
retaught. This was followed by more lesson quizzes administered as previously
Ojeda
11
described. The unit was completed with a final chapter test consisting of questions from
the whole unit. During testing students were directed to move into "test mode" where
they moved their desks so they had a one foot gap between their desk and their nearest
neighbor. This was done to minimize distractions that might impact assessment results.
Students were not allowed to talk to each other during quizzes and tests. They were
allowed to ask the researcher for clarification on questions. Each quiz and test was
corrected in class by the students and then reviewed by the researcher. This was done to
provide students with immediate feedback on their work.
Strategy 1: All Assessments with Second Chance
All unit assessments included with the textbook adoption were used. After each
assessment was given and corrected, either a quiz or test, students were offered the
chance to correct the problems they missed, while displaying their work, for additional
credit. In the case of quizzes, students were offered the chance to earn back all credit by
working the problems out again and resubmitting their corrected quiz. On tests
students were offered the chance to correct their missed problems for half the credit
missed. The researchers intention was to determine if student performance could be
influenced by a greater frequency of assessments, coupled with immediate feedback and
the opportunity to correct assessments for additional credit. Only raw uncorrected
scores were used in this study. The improved scores were used only for calculating
student grades.
Strategy 2: All Assessments, Summarizing and Note Taking
During instruction students were asked to divide a page down the middle. In the left
margin students were directed to take notes that included lesson examples and
vocabulary. In the right margin students were directed to expand on notes with their
Ojeda
12
own examples and explanations. A pre-test assessment was given the first day before
instruction. Midway through the unit a mid-chapter test was given. At the end of the
Unit a chapter test was administered.
Data Collection and Recording
Data used to evaluate the instruction strategies was collected through formative
assessment, observation and summative assessment. Each strategy received a one unit
time frame, which generally worked out to a two week period. The first day of each unit
a complete chapter test was be administered. The score of these assessments was
converted to a percentage mean for the whole class and compared on an individual basis
with mid-chapter assessment scores and the chapter summative assessment scores.
Unit formative assessments consisted of several lesson quizzes given the day after
formal instruction on the quiz content had been completed and only after a session of
homework correction and reteaching. Copies of all assessments were kept to allow for
comparison among content areas as determined by the lesson designation printed in
each section of each assessment. These were used to determine any changes in
performance as related to each lesson area.
IV. Study Results
To compare the two strategies it was necessary to find a way to measure the efficacy of
each strategy for the class as a whole. The researcher chose to compare growth in scores
from the pretest to the final test (Figure 1 and 2). A mean of this set of differences was
calculated for each strategy as was the standard deviation for each. The justification for
comparing the two strategies in this manner was that this measure quantified the
growth students made during each strategy and provided a clear picture of how
Ojeda
13
consistently this growth was seen over the population (as shown by the standard
deviation).
Figure 1 All Assessments Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage Scores
Ojeda
14
Figure 2 Notes Pre-Test and Final Test Raw Percentage Scores
The subjects showed a mean growth of 55 percentage points in the All Assessments
unit of the study. Individual scores fell within a standard deviation of 14.21 percentage
points of the mean. The highest growth in percentage points observed was observed in
subject 7015 at 79 percentage points of growth. The lowest observed growth was
observed in subject 7003 at 37 points of growth (Figure 3).
Ojeda
15
Figure 3 All Assessment % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test
During the Notes unit subjects showed a mean growth of 31 percentage points. In this
unit scores fell within a standard deviation of 22.86 points from the mean value. The
highest growth was observed with subject 7006, who showed a 67 percentage point
growth from their pretest score. The lowest growth observed during this unit was that of
subject 7005, who showed a -5 percentage points loss from their pre-test score to the
final score (Figure 4).
Ojeda
16
Figure 4 Notes % Points Growth from Pre-Test to Final Test
Differences were observed with the two strategy unit mean growth measures (Figure
5). A difference of 24 percentage points separate the two strategy growth means. Data
distribution, as determined by the standard deviation, showed a 9 percentage point
difference in the growth range. The All Assessments strategy elicited greater and more
consistent growth from this population of students. Conversely the Notes strategy
showed less growth and less consistency in the growth students experienced during that
unit.
Ojeda
17
Figure 5 All Assessments and Notes Growth Comparison
V. Conclusions
It is difficult to determine what to include when planning instruction. There are
endless variables to consider that may or may not have a significant impact on the
engagement and subsequent retention of learning expressed by students. This research
study was motivated by a desire to compose a means of comparing the efficacy of
different strategies. Prior to this study, using all the included assessments that come
with a given curriculum adoption had not seemed, to the researcher, to be of obvious
Ojeda
18
benefit. However, the results of this study are convincing enough for this researcher to
consider more carefully the role assessment can play in aiding student learning.
The results of the note-taking unit came as a surprise. It was assumed that the notes
unit would show at least as good a growth as the unit using all assessments. After all,
the strategy of guiding students to expand on their notes both during and after
instruction is frequently and widely encouraged. During the All Assessments unit,
students were not asked to do anything with their notes beyond recording what was
necessary for them to get started on their assignments. If these findings illuminate
anything it is that it is highly beneficial for the educator to have a measure for
determining and to reflect on what kind of growth is occurring during each instructional
units. It is also important to consider carefully what is being included in lessons and
whether or not each of those things is worth the planning and instructional time.
Student motivation may have played a significant role in why the All Assessment
strategy showed greater success. The ever present pressure of a coming formal
assessment coupled with the imediate feedback offered by each student's correcting of
his or her own paper and immediately being given time to correct their errors for
additional credit may be a motivating force. In many ways having frequent assessment
is like the immediate feedback individuals receive when they play a video game. If a
mistake is made the player knows right away and begins looking for ways to complete
the task successfully. Subjects in this study were observed to be highly motivated to
correct their mistakes for additional credit, which in turn provided needed review for
content they were weak on.
VI. Concerns, Limitations and Future Research
This study was conducted with a very small sample of students and should not be
considered generalizable. As is the nature of action research, in many ways the study
Ojeda
19
was designed and redesigned while the units were being instructed. Where it casts light
it exposes even more shadows. Comprehensive and comparable pre-tests were not
available so final chapter tests were given in there place. Growth was assessed based on
the differences between the pre-test score and the final unit test score. In the case of the
all assessments unit it is the researcher's belief that the pre-test given was of greater
difficulty than the final test for that unit. Which if true could mean that the benefits of
that strategy were greater than the data indicated.
For this study to be statistically testable it would need to be replicated, a control
established where neither strategy was in use and a larger data set compiled to compare
each strategies performance as averaged over several units time. This study should be
considered as a preliminary work, wherein it is this researcher's belief a need for
additional study is indicated by the findings.
Ojeda
20
References
Brighton, Catherine M.; Hertberg, Holly L.. (2004-00-00). Reconstructing the
Vision: Teachers' Responses to the Invitation to Change. RMLE Online:
Research in Middle Level Education. v27 n2 p1-20 2004. National Middle
School Association. ERIC #: EJ807413
CST Report. California Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)Three Rivers
Elementary School - All Students. 2010-02-01. http://star.cde.ca.gov/star
2009/ViewReport.asp?ps=true&lstTestYear=2009&lstTestType=C&lst
County=54&lstDistrict=72207-000&lstSchool=6054423&lstGroup=1&lstSubGroup=1
Di Fatta, Jenna; Garcia, Sarah; Gorman, Stephanie. Increasing Student Learning in
Mathematics with the Use of Collaborative Teaching Strategies. 2009-05-00. ERIC #:
ED504828
Evertson, Carolyn M.; Neal, Kristen W.. Looking into Learning-Centered
Classrooms: Implications for Classroom Management. Working Paper. National
Education Association Research Department. 2006-07-00. National Education
Association Research Department. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/
contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED495820. ERIC #: ED495820
Friend, Marilyn; Pope, Kimberly L.. (2005-00-00). Creating Schools in Which
All Students Can Succeed. Kappa Delta Pi Record. v41 n2 p56-61 Win 2005.
ERIC #: EJ683473
Gibson, Katherine D. (2009-06-00). Teachers' Perceptions of Strategy Based
Reading Instruction for Reading Comprehension. ERIC #: ED505543
Goodnough, Karen. (2003-04-00). Issues in Modified Problem-Based Learning:
A Study in Pre-Service Teacher Education. ERIC #: ED477797
Guskey, Thomas R. Educational Leadership. Using Data to Improve Student
Ojeda
21
Achievement - How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning. Pages 6-11.
February 2003 | Volume 60 | Number 5. ASCD.http://www.ascd.org/publicat
ions/educational_leadership/feb03/vol60/num05/How_Classroom_Assess
ments_Improve_Learning.aspx
Hall, Arnita Rena. Mini Literature Review Based on Brain Research and its Effect on
Educational Practice. 2007-06-26. ERIC #: ED497408
Hertberg-Davis, Holly L.; Brighton, Catherine M.. (2006-00-00). Support and
Sabotage: Principals' Influence on Middle School Teachers' Responses to
Differentiation. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education. v17 n2 p90-102 Win
2006. ERIC #: EJ746048
Igo, L. Brent; Bruning, Roger A.; Riccomini, Paul J.. Should Middle School Students
with Learning Problems Copy and Paste Notes from the Internet? Mixed-Methods
Evidence of Study Barriers. 2009-00-00. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level
Education. v33 n2 2009. National Middle School Association.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/
ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ867141. ERIC #:
EJ867141
Lopez, Doreen M.; Schroeder, Linda. Designing Strategies That Meet the Variety of
Learning Styles of Students. 2008-05-01. ERIC #: ED500848
Marzano, Robert J.; Gaddy, Barbara B.; Dean, Ceri. What Works in Classroom
Instruction. 2000-08-00. Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.
http://www.eric.ed. gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet
?accno=ED468434. ERIC #: ED468434
Marzano, Robert J. What Works in Schools. ASCD Online. 2003. http://www.as
cd.org/publications/books/102271/chapters/Instructional_Strategies.aspx
McMillan, James H.; Hearn, Jessica. "The Key to Stronger Student Motivation and
Higher
Ojeda
22
Achievement." Educational Horizons. v87 n1 p40-49 Fall 2008. Pi Lambda Theta, Inc.
2008-00-00. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/
ERICServlet?accno=EJ815370. ERIC #: EJ815370
Oginsky, Terri. Supporting the Development of Intrinsic Motivation in the Middle
School Classroom. 2003-06-20. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/
contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED482246. ERIC #: ED482246
Saban, Ahmet. (2009-00-00). Content Analysis of Turkish Studies about the
Multiple Intelligences Theory. Information Analyses; Journal Articles;
Reports - Research. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice. v9 n2 p859-
876 Spr 2009. Educational Consultancy, Ltd (EDAM). Kisikli Mh. Alemdag
Cd. Yan Yol Sk., SBK Is Merkezi No:5 Kat:1, Uskudar-Istanbul, 34692
Turkey. Tel: +90-216-481-30-23; Fax: +90-216-481-31-36; e-mail:
[email protected]; Web site: http://www.edam.com.tr/estp.asp. ERIC
#: EJ847783
Spires, Michele S.; Jaeger, Janet. (2002-05-00). A Survey of the Literature on
Ways to Use Web-Based and Internet Instruction Most Effectively:
Curriculum and Program Planning. ERIC #: ED477459
Sondergeld, Toni A.; Schultz, Robert A. (2008-00-00). Science, Standards,
and Differentiation: It Really Can Be Fun!. Gifted Child Today. v31 n1 p34-
40 Win 2008 .Prufrock Press Inc. P.O. Box 8813, Waco, TX 76714-8813.
Tel: 800-998-2208; Tel: 254-756-3337; e-mail: [email protected]; Web
site: http://www.prufrock.com. ERIC #: EJ781689
Toporski, Neil; Foley, Tim. Design Principles for Online Instruction: A New Kind of
Classroom. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education--TOJDE v5 n1 Jan 2004.
2004-01-00. ERIC #: ED494439
Van Hook, Steven R.. Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation as a Basic
Ojeda
23
Educational Praxis. 2008-06-15. ERIC #: ED501698Online Submission
Westberg, Karen L., Ed.; Archambault, Francis X., Jr., Ed. Profiles of Successful
Practices for
High Ability Students in Elementary Classrooms. Research Monograph 95122.
1995-09-00. ERIC #: ED413702
Wolpert, Gloria. Successful Daily Practices of Inclusion
Teachers of Children with Down Syndrome. 2001-03-27. ERIC #: ED453160
Ojeda
24