Effects of Modified Schema-Based Instruction on Addition and Subtraction Word Problem Solving of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Educational Studies College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services July 2, 2019 by Amanda G. Buncher B.S. University of Cincinnati, 2009 M.Ed. University of Cincinnati, 2011 Committee Chair: Dr. Casey Hord, PhD Abstract According to the United States Department of Education, students diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) make up approximately 7.6% of students with disabilities in the U.S and are being educated within the general education classroom at an increasing rate, requiring educators to modify their current practices to meet the needs of this continually growing population. Impairments in executive functioning central coherence, metacognition, and attention often create barriers for students with ASD in regards to their academic achievement. Mathematics word problem solving is an area of academic concern for students with ASD, requiring planning and organization (executive functioning) and metacognitive monitoring skills which are often lacking in students with ASD. The majority of strategies for this population target computational skills and math fluency with very few addressing word problem solving. One promising intervention that has been used recently with this population of students is schema-based instruction (SBI). The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of using SBI to teach word problem solving to students with ASD in the classroom setting. Intervention effectiveness was analyzed and discussed in addition to educational implications and recommendations for future research. Keywords: schema-based instruction, mathematics, autism spectrum disorder, word problem solving i ii Acknowledgements This has been a long and arduous process, with ups-and-downs along every step of the way. Pursuing a doctoral degree was not an avenue I had ever considered for myself. Through this journey, I have learned that there is more than one way to influence and impact the quality of instruction offered to students with disabilities. I had the pleasure of working directly with these students for over seven years and now I have the privilege of researching best practices for these very same students. The life of an educator never strays far from the students. I would like to first thank Dr. Casey Hord, my committee chair and graduate mentor, for opening my eyes to the possibilities within the world of special education. Thank you for your continued presence throughout this entire process; I would not have been able to navigate through these past three years without your guidance and support. Your fair judgement and sound advice have lead me in a productive and purposeful direction. In addition, I would like to thank my committee members, Drs. Ana DeJarnette and Heidi Kloos. Your willingness to assist and your advice during planning meetings made all the difference. Thank you all for being open-minded and flexible as I transitioned to a new career, began teaching at the collegiate level, and introduced a new baby to the world. To my new co-workers at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, including my manager, Erin Riehle, thank you for introducing me to the world of post-secondary transition for students with disabilities, but also for your patience as I completed this major milestone. I cannot wait to see what we accomplish next! To my dear friend and colleague, Christel Murphy, thank you continuing to encourage me through this program and for your constant support. To the students I have taught over the years during my role as a special educator; thank you for always challenging me to think in new ways to achieve the best possible outcomes. iii I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the participants of this study, without whom this dissertation would not be possible. It was such a pleasure to get to know you over the course of the study and I wish you all the best as you continue to grow and learn. To the wonderful classroom teacher that made this possible. This study would not have come to fruition if it had not been for her willingness to open her doors to me and change her schedule to meet the needs of the study. I am forever indebted to you, the administration, and classroom aides within the school for making all of this a reality. Most importantly, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to my family, who were truly the catalyst behind my entry into and successful completion from this program. Thank you to my husband, Kelon, for always encouraging me to pursue my dreams, whatever they may be. Your unwavering support helped me to persevere even when life got challenging. To my children, Ronan and Imogen, you are the lights of my life. You are too young now to realize the work that it took to complete this, but I hope that one day you too will face a challenge head-on and persevere through it. I truly hope that my work will encourage you to never sell yourselves short and be the best possible version of yourselves. To my parents, Ron and Donna Lipps, for providing additional childcare just about every Saturday for the past three years, and for believing in me even when this challenge seemed too big to tackle. To my mom for her unwavering commitment to my children as I navigated the world of full-time employment and doctoral work. To my dad for always expecting the best from me, but always providing support if needed. Thank you to my three sisters, Jordan, Lauren, and Emily Lipps for their “back-up” babysitting, words of encouragement, and much-needed smiles throughout this process. My entire extended family kept me on track and focused these past three years by always checking in whenever we were together. I love and appreciate all of you. iv Table of Contents Abstract................................................................................................................................ i Acknowledgements............................................................................................................ iii Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 Literature Review.............................................................................................................. 13 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 30 Results............................................................................................................................... 59 Discussion......................................................................................................................... 99 References....................................................................................................................... 110 Appendices...................................................................................................................... 133 v LIST OF TABLES 1. Zachariah’s Recent Evaluations .............................................................................. … 33 2. Mercedes’ Recent Evaluations...................................................................................... 34 3. Andres’ Recent Evaluations.......................................................................................... 35 4. Addition Instruction Process......................................................................................... 47 5. Subtraction Instruction Process..................................................................................... 50 6. Effects of SBI on Addition Word-Problem Solving: Phase, Means, and Tau………..62 7. Effects of SBI on Subtraction Word-Problem Solving: Phase, Means, and Tau …….64 8. Social Validity Measure Results: Student Participants……………………………….69 9. Social Validity Measure Results: Classroom Teacher ….…………………………....70 10. Zachariah’s Baseline Performance……………...……………………………………..72 11. Zachariah’s Addition Phase Performance……………………………………………..73 12. Zachariah’s Subtraction Phase Performance.………………………………………….75 13. Zachariah’s Maintenance Phase Performance….……………………………………...78 14. Mercedes’ Baseline Phase Performance…………………………………………….....80 15. Mercedes’ Addition Phase Performance………………………………………………82 16. Mercedes’ Subtraction Phase Performance……………………………………………85 17. Mercedes’ Maintenance Phase Performance…………………………………………..87 18. Andres’ Baseline Phase Performance………………………………………………….90 19. Andres’ Addition Phase Performance………………………………………………….92 20. Andres’ Subtraction Phase Performance……………………………………………….94 21. Andres’ Maintenance Phase Performance……………………………………………...97 vi LIST OF FIGURES 1. Participant Progress .......................................................................................................... 60 2. Zachariah’s Subtraction Strategy………………………………………………………...77 3. Mercedes’ Baseline Performance Example……………………………………………...79 4. Mercedes’ Addition Strategy…………………………………………………………….84 5. Andres’ Baseline Performance Example………………………………………………...89 vii Introduction Foundational skills, such as addition and subtraction, are the building blocks of mathematics proficiency and fluency (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 2014). The ability to perform basic math computations is necessary