A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES IN TEACHING MATH WORD STORY PROBLEM SOLVING TO SKILL DEFICIENT FOURTH GRADERS

This study compared a Direct Instruction method of teaching multiplication and division story problems to skill deficient fourth graders with a traditional approach. With the Direct Instruction method, teachers explicitly modeled step-by-step strategies for solving problem types. The traditional approach was based on the methods used in four state-adopted mathematics programs. Though teachers demonstrated how to solve problems, step-by-step strategies were not modeled. The major consideration was to ensure high interest and motivation by attempting to relate examples to students' everyday experience.;Seventy-three low performing fourth graders were randomly assigned to one of four groups. Daily instruction lasted 35 minutes. Subjects were taught in small groups (of two to four). The four experimental groups were: (1) DI with fixed amount of practice, (2) traditional instruction with fixed amount of practice, (3) DI with extended practice, and (4) traditional with extended practice.;The two groups taught with fixed number of practice problems received 120 multiplication and division problems, while the extended practice groups received up to eight additional lessons in their instructional program.;A 26 item test of word problems was administered immediately after treatment. A parallel form maintenance test was administered 10 days later.;Data were analyzed by a 2 x 2 x 2 ANCOVA with repeated measures. The between-subject factors were (a) Type of Instruction and (b) Provision of extended Practice. The within-subject factor was (c) Time of Test (Post vs. Maintenance). The covariate were the scores on a screening test of problem solving.;The results indicated a significant three way interaction. Therefore, separate 2 x 2 analyses of simple main effects were performed on the post and maintenance tests. Post test result revealed that both DI groups performed significantly higher than the traditional groups. There was no effect for provision of extended practice.;On the Maintenance test, a significant interaction was found between Type of Instruction and Provision of Extended Practice.;Provision of additional practice tended to enhance performance on the maintenance test somewhat for children taught with DI. Surprisingly, it did not improve performance of students taught with traditional methods on either the posttest test or maintenance.