Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol 6, No. 2, 1997

Computer Technology, Science Education, and Studentswith Learning Disabilities

David Kumar and Cynthia L. Wilson1

The ways computer technology could be used to teach science to students with learningdisabilities (LD) are explored. Science is for all students and that includes students with LD.Learning science has both cognitive and affective implications for students with LD. In thiscontext, computer technology provides cognitively engaging and motivating instructional toolsfor individualizing the mode of delivery, developing expert tutors; anchoring instruction; in-tegrating science with other subjects; reducing cognitive load on working memory; and mo-tivating students to stay on task. These applications are discussed with implications forteaching science to students with LD.

INTRODUCTION

This paper will explore ways of improving thequality of science education for students with learn-ing disabilities (LD) using computer technology. Ac-cording to national science organizations such as theAmerican Association for the Advancement of Sci-ence (1989), K-12 science education should benefitall students. Holahan, McFarland, and Piccillo(1994), in a summary of studies [by Gregory, Shana-han, and Walberg (1985); Ysseldyke, Thurlow, Chris-teason, and Weiss (1987); Harnish and Wilkinson,1989; Patton, Polloway, and Cronin (1990)] reportedthe following picture of science education for stu-dents with disabilities. Among high schoolers, stu-dents with disabilities scored significantly lowergrades on science tests than students without disabili-ties. The instructional time devoted to students withmild disabilities in science was less than that in read-ing. About 42% of special education teachers had noscience training and 38% of children in self-con-tained classes received no science instruction. Lessthan 60 minutes per week was devoted to teaching

1orida Atlantic Univenity, College of Education, 2912 CollegeAvenue, Davie, Florida 33314.

science by half the special educators who teach sci-ence. As Holahan, et al. (1994) stated, despite callsfor making science beneficial for "all," very little ef-fort has been made to make science available to stu-dents with disabilities.

One potential tool for making science availableto all students is computer technology. For example,the electronic "information super highway" is capableof bringing scientific information to the fingertips ofall learners and teachers in the U.S. While these ef-forts are purported to be improving the quality of sci-ence education for all, they are often biased and serveonly the average pupils, referred to as the "normalstudents." Unfortunately, very little has been donewith respect to improving the quality of science edu-cation to meet the needs of students with disabilities.

Students with Learning Disabilities

In defiance of normal intellectual functioning,students with LD exhibit academic deficits that im-pede their progress in the general education class-room. While they have the same needs as otherstudents, their access to creative and challenginglearning opportunities often is impaired. Their defi-cient skills in the basic areas affect their abilities to

1551059-0145/97/0600-0155$12.50/0 C 1997 Plenum Publishing Corporation

KEY WORDS: Science; learning disability; computer technology.

156 Kumar and Wilson

understand and enjoy learning in the sciences. Forexample, these students may find it difficult to readcontent-area textbooks, listen and take notes in class,produce coherent written work, or take tests. Fur-thermore, they may lack the experiences, vocabulary,and study strategies necessary for school success. Yet,most teachers rely on lectures, textbooks, and writtentests as the primary means of delivering and evalu-ating instruction in content-area classes such as sci-ence. Even when students with LD are able to getpassing grades in their general education content-area classes, such as science, they still receive lowergrades than do their low-achieving peers. For exam-ple, Donahoe and Zigmond (1990) found that ninth-grade youngsters with LD received lower grades thandid their low-achieving peers in the same generaleducation social studies and health classes and 69%of ninth-grade students with LD earned a D or below

in science.Additionally, research has shown that LD stu-

dents are generally slower in executing basic mathe-matics problems; this poses a deficit that couldimpede their progress in science (Goldman, Pelle-grino, and Mertz, 1988). According to one study(Goldman et al., 1988), such deficiencies, at least inmathematics, are largely due to delayed learning asopposed to developmentally different reasoning fromnormal students. Therefore, the skills and reasoningstrategies of students with LD have been found tobe largely the same as normal students, but they oc-cur at later ages.

A large portion of the energy of students withLD is focused on the solution of simple tasks; thus,less cognitive energy is available for the developmentof the complex reasoning skills required in science.These same students often have low self-esteem andlow motivation associated with prior frustratinglearning experiences. Technological tools such asthose described in this paper contain several uniquefeatures that address the aforementioned concerns.

Why Science Education for Students withLearning Disabilities?

There are two major reasons for providing sci-ence education for students with LD. The first reasonis constitutional and the second pedagogical. TheAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA), often re-ferred to as the "most comprehensive civil rights leg-islation since the 1960s" (Stinson, 1993, p. 71), alongwith the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

(IDEA), give the constitutional justification for pro-viding access to science education for all students.Therefore, it is not out of charity that students withLD be provided as solid an education as those with-out LD, but it is the legal right of students with LDthat they must be given access to all available edu-cational opportunities in the United States.

From a pedagogical perspective, science is a sub-ject which is cognitive and affective in nature(Lawson, 1994; Simpson, Koballa, Oliver, andCrawley, 1994). Science is a subject quite suitable fordeveloping thinking and problem solving skills andenhancing the affective attributes, such as better at-titude towards the world among students with disabili-ties. In effect, science is both hands-on and minds-onin practice. As Aldridge (1992) said, "science isneeded by everyone and everyone [including thosewith LD] is capable of learning and enjoying science"(p. 14). However, with the existing traditional instruc-tional practices such as lecture, teacher demonstra-tion and rote learning, it is difficult to make scienceinteresting and appealing to students with LD. Thispresent condition of a lack of opportunities for in-volvement of students with LD in science educationis obvious when Reith and Polsgrove (1994) opinedthat there is very little emphasis on science educationin special education. On the other hand, consideringthe advantages of science education mentioned ear-lier, it is critical to search for alternative instructionaltools for teaching science to students with LD. In thiscontext, how computer technology could be used todeliver science education and make science more ap-pealing to students with LD is worth exploring.

An examination of the literature in science edu-cation, technology education and special educationrevealed that scant attention was given to how com-puter technology could be used to deliver scienceeducation to students with LD. A search of the Edu-cational Resource and Information Center (ERIC)database showed that there was a paucity of publish-ed studies discussing and/or presenting computer-as-sisted instruction as one of the effective interventiontechniques for making science education a meaning-ful experience for students with disabilities. There-fore, other more direct sources of information wereconsulted for this paper.

The Role of Computer Technology

Computer technology is gaining wide acceptancein science teaching and learning. Interactive videos,

Technology, Science and Learning Disability 157

hypermedia/multimedia environments, and virtual re-ality are replacing earlier educational computing ap-plications like low level drill and practice software.These newer technologies have not only improved thequality of computer applications in education, butalso provided a basis for understanding human cog-nition and learning. Using computer environments forteaching science to students with disabilities has bothcognitive and affective implications. Computer tech-nology could provide cognitiveh/ challenging environ-ments for the development of analytical, criticalthinking, reasoning and problem solving skills in stu-dents. Also technology could provide students with in-teresting and motivating learning experiences thatwould help them to stay on task. Using computertechnology, science educators and researchers can fa-cilitate the teaching of science to students with learn-ing disabilities through: individualizing the mode ofdelivery; developing expert tutors; anchoring instruc-tion; integrating science with other subjects; reducingcognitive load on working memory; and motivatingstudents to stay on task. Further discussion will high-light these instructional attributes of computer tech-nology with reference to students with LD.

Individualizing the Mode of Delivery

Textual information may often not be appreci-ated by students with LD. In this respect, computersare ideal tools for individualizing the mode of deliv-ery of presentation and style of interaction(Hythecker, Rocklin, Dansereau, Lambiotte, andO'Donnel, 1985; Bristor and Drake, 1994; Lovitt andHorton, 1994). For example, in biology lessons, stu-dents may be presented with the option of choosinginformation in the form of text, still pictures or vid-eos depending upon his/her individual level of atten-tion and comprehension. Hypermedia software suchas HyperCard (TM) and Linkway (TM) provideenormous opportunities for improving presentationmodes to suit the individual needs of learners.

These computer tools have the potential for pro-viding additional support for students when learningthrough the use of multimedia involving audio (e.g.,pronunciation and explanation of words) and anima-tion and video to demonstrate complex concepts.Multimedia presentations are highly visual in nature,providing step-by-step highly pictorial instructionrather than prose. Because of students' impairedlearning abilities, a teacher cannot always assumestudents have read and understood traditional labo-

ratory science instructions. Therefore, students withimpaired reading or math skills are less disadvan-taged than they might be in a traditional science cur-riculum. For example, in a study involving studentswith LD, Higgins and Boone (1990) found that thosestudents who received hypertext-based instructionscored the highest on a daily quiz compared to thosewho received lecture and lecture plus hypertext-based instructions. Through the use of flexible hy-pertext instructional tools that emphasize simple,sequential, and pictorial instructions, teachers can bemore assured that students are understanding the in-structions given. In addition, students have the powerto re-run, retest, or practice ideas as often as theywish, and at a time of their choosing. Individuals canwork at their own pace through a lesson doing what-ever level of work their learning allows.

Developing Expert Tutors

In traditional classroom settings it may be prac-tically impossible for a teacher to give individual helpor attention to students with LD. With computertechnology, it is possible to develop expert tutors toprovide higher cognitive level learning experienceson an individual basis. Expert tutors are known toimprove student thinking and problem-solving skillsto the level of the experts modelled by the tutor (La-joie and Lesgold, 1989; Dori, Dori, and Yochim,1992). For example, Lajoie and Lesgold (1989) de-scribed "SHERLOCK," a computer-based tutor totrain Airforce trainees in troubleshooting. Novicetrainees who used SHERLOCK were able to per-form at a level equal to that of their colleagues withfour more years of on-the-job experience.

Advantages of expert tutors for students withLD include the ability of expert tutors to present in-struction in small sequential steps for problem solv-ing, to provide variable levels of difficulty and reviewof concepts, and to allow students to work inde-pendently (Bos and Vaughn, 1994). However, criticalto the success of expert tutors used by students withLD is the analysis of student performance and useof effective instruction (Bos and Vaughn, 1994). Theprogram should provide the student and teacher withspecific corrective feedback. For applications of ex-pert systems for the diagnosis and treatment of learn-ing problems please refer to Hofmeister and Lubke(1988) and van Geldern, Ferrara, Parry, and Rude(1991).

158 Kumar and Wilson

Anchoring Instruction

'Anchored instruction" is an instructional tech-nique where videodiscs of real world problem situ-ations are used as "anchors" to provide a macrocontext for students to gain a meaningful under-standing of the topic they learn (Cognition and Tech-nology Group at Vanderbilt, CTGV 1990). Accordingto Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer and Wil-liams (1990), "the major goal of anchored instructionis to enable students to notice critical features ofproblem situations and to experience the changes intheir perception and understanding of the anchor asthey view the situation from new points of view" (p.135). In this respect, the use of videodiscs helps stu-dents revisit problem situations and overcome "inertknowledge," that is the knowledge people possess butoften fail to recall spontaneously for problem solvingdue to a lack of meaningful context (Whitehead,1929).

The potential to provide students with an arrayof concrete visual representations of concepts and re-lationships through the use of videodiscs is particu-larly promising for teaching students with learningproblems (Hofmeister, Engelmann, and Carnine,1989). The images can be presented in slow motion,fast motion, or frame by frame allowing students withLD to critically view (and review as necessary) thefeatures of problem situations at their own learningpace. The ability to store and randomly access largeamounts of information is an added advantage.

Integrating Science with Other Subjects

Computer technology is an ideal tool for remov-ing the barriers that separate science and other dis-ciplines such as language arts and reading.Integrating science with other disciplines has cogni-tive and affective implications, because integratedapproaches to instruction demand the use of boththe right and left brain hemispheres (Fortner, 1990).Thus, for example, students with LD are encouragedto use their linear and non-linear metaphoric waysof thinking leading to meaningful understanding ofthe concepts and principles discussed in sciencecourses. The multiple mode of presentation of infor-mation using multimedia can help students to see anyinformation beyond the boundaries of subject mat-ters. Bristor and Drake (1994) reported a five yearstudy of integrating science and language arts in

which they have employed several modes of infor-mation presentation with the aid of technology.

Science telecommunications networks provideexcellent opportunities for integrating science withother disciplines. Student enthusiasm for Kids Net-work (a science telecommunications network) re-sulted in student-initiated activities of writing toother students at different lab stations, bringing innewspaper clippings, verifying data through compari-son with supplemental professional data, and im-proved collaborative writing of reports viaword-processing packages (Tinker, 1987). For stu-dents with LD, science telecommunications networkscan give "expanded access to the physical and socialworld, bringing it closer to them—even if indi-rectly—to be examined as it has not been before"(Cuffaro, 1984, p. 565).

Reducing Cognitive Load on Working Memory

Students with LD experience difficulties doingmental operations involving several variables at atime. Thinking and problem solving involving morethan one variable at a time is a skill necessary forsurvival in science at higher grade levels, and mightpose a problem for students with LD due to theirlimited working memory. Computers have been cred-ited with functioning like an external human mem-ory, and thus believed to be reducing the load onworking memory in situations involving computer in-teractive learning and problem solving in science(Champagne and Klopfer, 1984; Kumar, White, andHelgeson, 1994a). For example, in a study of noviceand expert high school chemistry students solvingstoichiometric problems Kumar, et al. (1994a) foundthat novice students using computers performed at alevel similar to expert students using the paper-and-pencil method. In a physics problem-solving experi-ment Staver (1986) found that the performance levelof students increased as the number of independentvariables was decreased, leading one to believe thatthe amount of memory space required to think whilesolving a problem has direct consequences on theoutcome. Considering this view point in light of thepoor working memory students with LD possess, itcould be constructively argued that computers havea lot to offer in aiding their working memory via in-teractive computer tasks. In this context, the role ofinnovative input devices such as induction pen (usedin pen-point computers) in reducing the human-com-puter interaction at the cognitive-psychology-com-

Technology, Science and Learning Disability 159

puter-technology interface (Kumar, Helgeson, andWhite, 1994) should not be overlooked. Input deviceslike the induction pen might improve the perform-ance of students with LD in computer interactiveproblem-solving tasks in science by enabling them tobetter convey their cognitive processes than tradi-tional paper-and-pen methods.

Motivating Students to Stay On Task

Computers are excellent motivational tools tokeep students on task. According to Jackson (1988),computer features such as immediate formative feed-back to students about their performance play a sig-nificant role in motivating students to stay on taskand complete their assignment. In a study, Kumar,et al (1994a) noticed that the time-on-task for thenovice chemistry problem solvers using computerswas significantly higher than their counterparts usingtraditional paper-and-pencil method.

Maintaining attention on learning tasks is oftena problem for students with LD. Lack of attentionfrequently leads to impaired and frustrated learning,leaching strategies that can encourage students withLD to remain interested and working are thereforeespecially beneficial. For example, students with LDoften remain more cognitively engaged when usingtechnological tools than without them, particularlywhen corrective feedback is immediately provided(Goldenberg, Russell, and Carter, 1984).

SUMMARY

A few ways computer technology could be usedto facilitate the teaching of science to students withLD from that of rote practice to higher level thinkinghave been presented in this paper. They include in-dividualizing the mode of delivery, developing experttutors, anchoring instruction, integrating science withother subjects, reducing cognitive load on workingmemory, and motivating students to stay on task. Thesalient features of each of these were discussed.

The instructional attributes of computer technol-ogy discussed in this paper have tremendous potentialto improve the cognitive and affective aspects of sci-ence education for students with LD. Authoring sys-tems and multimedia permit teachers and students toprepare individualized lessons and examinations. Thecapabilities for individualizing instruction using tech-nology can not only lead to engaged learning but also

to more meaningful knowledge acquisition (Songer,1989; Tinker, 1987). Expert systems and anchored in-struction provide opportunities for simulations thatemphasize problem-solving abilities and the develop-ment of knowledge. Application systems such as wordprocessing and database management are ideal for theintegration of science with other disciplines and allowstudents to be active planners and communicators.Learning environments containing multiple sources ofinformation and multiple viewpoints can be providedfor student exploration and integration into a personalconstruction of meaning. In effect, active participationof students with LD in science using technology expo-ses them to meaningful learning and enables them toappreciate science, and could result in more studentswith LD making science a possible career choice.

Additionally, computer-enhanced classroomscould lead to greater teacher innovation and morepositive student-teacher interactions between studentswith LD and science teachers. Teachers may findthemselves spending more time encouraging individ-ual students rather than lecturing or providing all theinformation themselves. The role of the teacher maychange from provider of all information to that of an"idea coach" (Songer, 1989, p. 38). Teacher educa-tion programs must provide teacher candidates withexperiences in teaching science to students with LDby using technology (Egelston-Dodd, 1995).

If science education is for all students, then it isnecessary to devise strategies for involving studentswith LD hi science. As discussed in this paper, com-puter technology provides a powerful tool for gettingstudents with LD actively engaged in learning science.Technology can be used to engage students with learn-ing disabilities in meaningful learning instead of rotepractice with discreet scientific concepts. Technologiesprovide students with mechanisms for accessing dataand understanding complex problems, or with oppor-tunities for dialogue and discussion. Once adept atusing technology, students have quick access to mul-tiple resources and tools for combining those re-sources. They can spend less time looking for answersand information, and more time analyzing, reflectingand developing an understanding.

There is a lack of attention in the research, de-velopment and implementation of technology toteaching science to students with LD (Egelston-Dodd, 1995). Science educators, special educatorsand technology educators should make collaborativeefforts to develop innovative computer technologytools for making science both cognitively and affec-

160 Kumar and Wilson

tively appealing to students with LD. More researchand development efforts are needed to accomplishthis task with a genuine concern for making scienceinstruction available to students with LD.

REFERENCES

Aldridge, B. G. (1992). Project on Scope, Sequence, and Coordi-nation: A synthesis for improving science education. Journalof Science Education and Technology, 1(1), 13-21.

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989).Science for all Americans: A project 2061 report on literacy goalsin science, mathematics, and technology. Washington, DC.

Bos, C. S. and Vaughn, S. (1994). Strategies for teaching studentswith learning and behavioral problems (3rd ed). Allyn and Ba-con. Boston, Massachusetts.

Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C.K., and Williams, S. M. (1990). Anchored instruction: Whywe need it and how technology can help. In Nix, D., andSpiro, R. (eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia.Lawrence Eribaum. Hillsdale, New Jersey.

Bristor, V. J. and Drake, S. V. (1994). Linking the language artsand content areas through visual technology. TechnologicalHorizons in Education Journal, 22(2), 74-77.

Champagne, A. B. and Klopfer, L. E. (1984). Research in scienceeducation: Cognitive psychology perspective. In D. Holdzkomand P. B. Lutz (Eds.), Research within reach: Science educa-tion. National Science Teachers Association. Washington,DC

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). Anchoredinstruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educa-tional Researcher, 19(6), 2-10.

Cuffaro, H. K. (1984). Microcomputers in education: Why is ear-lier better? Teachers College Record, 85(65), 559-568.

Donahoe, K. and Zigmond, N. (1990). Academic grades of ninth-grade urban learning disabled students and low-achievingpeers. Exceptionality, 1, 17-27.

Don, Y. J., Dori, D., and Yochim, J. E. (1992). Characteristics ofan intelligent computer-assisted instruction shell with an ex-ample in human physiology. Journal of Computers in Mathe-matics and Science Teaching, 11(3/4), 289-302.

Egelston-Dodd, J. (1995). Proceedings. Working Conference on sci-ence for persons with disabilities. University of Northern Iowa.Cedar Falls, lowa.

Fortner, R. W. (1990). How to combine language arts and sciencein the classroom. Science Activities, 27(4), 34-37.

Goldenberg, E., Russell, S., and Carter, C. (1984). Computers, edu-cation and special needs. Addison-Wesley. Reading, MA.

Goldman, S., Pellegrino, J., and Mertz, D. (1988). Extended prac-tice of basic addition facts: Strategy changes in learning-dis-abled students. Cognition and Instruction, 5(3), 223-265.

Gregory, J., Shanahan, T., and Walberg, H. (1985). Learning dis-abled 10th graders in mainstreaming settings: A descriptiveanalysis. Remedial and Special Education, 6(4), 25-33.

Harnisch, D. and Wilkinson, I. (1989). Cognitive return of schoolingfor the handicapped: Preliminary findings from high school andbeyond. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Ameri-can Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

Higgins, K. and Boone, R. (1990). Hypertext computer studyguides and the social studies achievement of students withlearning disabilities, remedial students, and general educationstudents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 529-540.

Hofmeister, A. M., Engelmann, S., and Carnine, D. (1989). De-veloping and validating science education videodiscs. Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 26,665-677.

Hofmeister, A M. and Lubke, M. M. (1988). Expert systems: Im-plications for the diagnosis and treatment of learning disabili-ties. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 11, 287-291.

Holahan, G., McFarland, J., and Piccillo, B. A. (1994). Elementaryschool science for students with disabilities. Remedial and Spe-cial Education, 15(2), 86-93.

Hythecker, V., Rocklin, T., Danseraeu, D., Lambiotte, J., andO'Donnel, A. (1985). A computer-based learning strategytraining module: Development and evaluation. Journal ofEducational Computing Research, 1, 275-283.

Jackson, B. (1988). A comparison between computer-based andtraditional assessment tests, and their effects on pupil learningand scoring. School Science Review, 96(249), 809-815.

Kumar, D. D., White, A. L., and Helgeson, S. L. (1994a). A studyof the effect of HyperCard and pen-paper performance as-sessment methods on expert-novice chemistiy problem solv-ing. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 3(3),187-200.

Kumar, D. D., Helgeson, S. L., and White, A. L. (1994). Computertechnology-cognitive psychology interface and science per-formance assessment. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 42(4), 6-16.

LaJoie, S. P. and Lesgold, A. (1989). Apprenticeship training inthe workplace: Computer-coached practice environment as anew form of apprenticeship. Machine-Mediated Learning, 3,7-28.

Lawson, A. E. (1994). Research on the acquisition of scienceknowledge: Epistemiological foundations of cognition. In Ga-bel, D. (ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching andlearning. Macmillan Publishing Company, 131-176. NewYork.

Lovitt, T. C. and Horton, S. V. (1994). Strategies for adaptingscience textbooks for youth with learning disabilities. Reme-dial and Special Education, 15(2), 105-116.

Patton, J., Polloway, E., and Cronin, M. (1990). A survey of specialeducation teachers relative to science for the handicapped. Un-published manuscript, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Reith, H. J. and Polsgrove, L. (1994). Curriculum and instructionalissues in teaching secondary students with learning disabilities.Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9(2), 118-126.

Simpson, R. D., Koballa, Jr., T. R, Oliver, J. S., and Crawley,III, F. E. (1994). Research on the affective dimension of sci-ence learning. In Gabel, D. (ed.), Handbook of research onscience teaching and learning. Macmillan Publishing Company,211-234. New York.

Songer, N. B. (1989). Technological tools for scientific thinkingand discovery. Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 5,23-41.

Staver, J. R. (1986). The effects of problem format, number ofindependent variables, and their interaction on student per-formance on a control of variables reasoning problem. Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 23(6), 533-542.

Stinson, B. (1993). Getting started with adaptive technology:Meeting the needs of disabled students. Florida Technologyin Education Quarterly, 6(1), 71-76.

Tinker, R. (1987). In our view: Real science education. HandsOn! 10(1), 2. (Technical Education Research Centers, Cam-bridge, Massachusetts).

van Geldem, L, Ferrara, J. M., Parry, J. D., and Rude, H. (1991).Local validation of mandate consultant An expert system forassuring compliance in the IEP process. Journal of SpecialEducation Technology, 11, 113-120.

Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education. New York:Macmillan Publishing Company.

Ysseldyke, J., Thurlow, M., Christenson, S., and Weiss, J. (1987).Time allocated to instruction of mentally retarded, learningdisabled, emotionally disturbed and nonhandicapped elemen-tary students. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 23-42.