In this introduction to the special issue, the author provides a brief overview of (a) standards-based mathematics and implications for students with learning disabilities and those at risk for mathematics difficulties and (b) research on mathematics interventions/instructional practices and student outcomes. Furthermore, the author highlights how the articles in this special issue address these areas. The article concludes with a description of the purposes of this special issue.
BakerS.GerstenR.LeeD. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. Elementary School Journal, 103, 51–73. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002308
2.
BallD. L.HillH. C.BassH. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide?American Educator, 29, 14–22 and 43–46. Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/fall2005/index.cfm
3.
BaxterJ. A.WoodwardJ.OlsonD. (2001). Effects of reform-based mathematics instruction on low achievers in five third-grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 101, 529–547. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002122
4.
BaxterJ. A.WoodwardJ.VoorhiesJ.WongJ. (2002). We talk about it, but do they get it?Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 17, 173–185. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00043
5.
BrushT.SayeJ. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds with hypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10, 333–356.
6.
ClementsD. H.SaramaJ.SpitlerM. E.LangeA. A.WolfeC. B. (2011). Mathematics learned by young children in an intervention based on learning trajectories: A large-scale cluster randomized trial. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42, 127–166. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/publications/article.aspx?id=29863
7.
CohenD.HillH. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8.
GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 4–15. doi:10.1177/00222194040370010201
9.
GerstenR.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarshL.StarJ. R.WitzelB. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, USDOE.
10.
GerstenR.ChardD. J.JayanthiM.BakerS. K.MorphyP.FlojoJ. (2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431
11.
GriffinC. C.LeagueM. B.GriffinV. L. (2012). Indicators of effective teaching practices in inclusive elementary mathematics classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly.
12.
HudsonP.MillerS. P.ButlerF. (2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35, 19–32.
13.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq.
14.
JitendraA. K.RodriguezM.KaniveR. G.HuangJ.-P.ChurchC.CorroyK. C.ZaslofskyA. F. (2012). The impact of small-group tutoring interventions on the mathematical problem solving and achievement of third grade students with mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly.
15.
KrawecJ.HuangJ.MontagueM.KresslerB.SarduyL. O.MeliadeAlbaA. (2012). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on knowledge of math problem-solving processes of middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly.
16.
KroesbergenE. H.Van LuitJ. E. H. (2003). Mathematics intervention for children with special educational needs. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 97–114. doi:10.1177/07419325030240020501
17.
LehJ.JitendraA. K. (2012). A comparison of the effects of teacher-mediated and computer-mediated instruction on the mathematical word problem solving performance of third grade students with mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly.
18.
MazzoccoM. M. M. (2007). Defining and differentiating mathematical learning disabilities and difficulties. In BerchD. B.MazzoccoM. M. M. (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children: The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 7–28). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
19.
MontagueM.JitendraA. K. (Eds.). (2006). Teaching mathematics to middle school students with learning difficulties. New York, NY: Guilford.
20.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
21.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
22.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common Core State Standards (Mathematics). Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://www .corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf
23.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
24.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. In KilpatrickJ.SwaffordJ.FindellB. (Eds.), Mathematics Study Committee, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25.
No Child Left Behind. (2002). 20 U.S.C. §16301 et. seq.
26.
RemillardJ. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 7, 211–246. doi:10.3102/00346543075002211
27.
RowanB.CorrentiR.MillerR. J. (2002). What large-scale survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the prospects study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525–1567.
28.
SayeskiK. L.PaulsenK. J. (2010). Mathematics reform curricula and special education: Identifying intersections and implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 13–21. doi:10.1177/1053451210369515
29.
SilverE.SmithM.NelsonB. (1995). The QUASAR project: Equity concerns meet mathematics education reform in the middle school. In SecadaW.FennemaE.AdajainL. (Eds.), New directions for equity in mathematics education (pp. 9–56). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
30.
SteinM. K.KaufmanJ. H. (2010). Selecting and supporting the use of mathematics curricula at scale. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 663–693. doi:10.3102/0002831209361210
31.
SwansonH. L.HoskynM. (1998). Experimental intervention research on students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 68, 277–321. doi:10.3102/00346543068003277
32.
TarrJ. E.ReysR. E.ReysB. J.ChavezO.ShihJ.OsterlindS. J. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247–280.
33.
WoodwardJ.BaxterJ. (1997). The effects of an innovative approach to mathematics on academically low achieving students in mainstreamed settings. Exceptional Children, 63, 373–388.
34.
XinY. P.JitendraA. K. (1999). The effects of instruction in solving mathematical word problems for students with learning problems: A meta-analysis. Journal of Special Education, 32, 207–225. doi:10.1177/002246699903200402
