Additional information
| Dimensions | 8.5 × 11 in |
|---|---|
| Cover | Paperback |
| Dimensions (W) | 8 1/2" |
| Dimensions (H) | 11" |
| Page Count | 42 |
| Publisher | Edge Enterprises, Inc. |
| Year Printed | 1993 |
| Requirements |
Concept Mastery Routine: Instructor’s manual
Janis A. BulgrenJean B. Schumaker
Donald D. Deshler
Often, students’ eyes glaze over when a teacher mentions abstract concepts like “democracy,” “photosynthesis,” and “integer.” Such “glazed” effects can be avoided by using the Concept Mastery Routine to help students analyze such concepts in a logical, non-threatening way.
At the heart of this routine is a form called the Concept Diagram. In partnership, the teacher and students use this diagram to analyze the characteristics of a key concept that are always present, sometimes present, and never present in examples of the concept. They also generate examples and non-examples of the concept, figure out a larger category to which the concept belongs, and create a definition for the concept.
This instructor’s manual provides step-by-step instructions on how to introduce this routine to students and use the routine over time. A coordinated CD provides professional development for the routine. Please remember to purchase the CD set (which includes a CD and manual) if you do not have a professional development code!
$12.50
Description
Research on the Concept Mastery Routine
Overview
This study investigated the effects of teacher use of the Concept Mastery Routine on students’ test performance in general education classes. Nine science and social studies teachers learned how to use the routine and used it for one concept in each instructional unit. Four hundred seventy-five high school students enrolled in their classes participated in the study. Thirty-two of these students had learning disabilities. A multiple-baseline across-teachers design was used with the teachers; a multiple-baseline across-classes design was employed with the students. Two types of tests were used as student research instruments: (1) publisher-made tests corresponding to each unit in the textbook and (2) researcher-made tests that focused on the taught concepts. Both types of tests were administered at the end of each unit.
Results
Results indicated that the teachers learned to use the routine at mastery levels within three hours of instruction. Their students scored significantly higher on both publisher-made classroom tests and researcher-constructed concept acquisition tests in science and social studies classes when the routine was used versus when it was not used. On regularly scheduled publisher-made classroom tests, the scores of students without LD improved from a mean of 72% correct at baseline to a mean of 87% correct following use of the routine, whereas the mean scores of students with LD improved from a mean of 60% correct during baseline to 71% correct following use of the routine. Similarly, on tests measuring student acquisition of concepts, the scores of students without disabilities improved from a mean of 49% correct at baseline to 83% correct following use of the routine, whereas the scores of students with LD improved from a mean of 40% correct during baseline to 62% correct following use of the routine. Moreover, 57% of the students with LD and 68% of the non-LD students were passing the regularly scheduled unit tests before the intervention, and 75% of the LD students and 97% of the non-LD students were passing unit tests after the intervention.
Conclusions
The strengths of this study are that regularly assigned teachers used the routine in regularly scheduled inclusive science and social studies courses at the high school level using actual content information and tests at that level. The study showed that, under those conditions, the routine produced enhanced learning as demonstrated by student test scores on routinely scheduled unit tests as well as on specially constructed concept tests for students with and without LD.
References
Bulgren, J., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (1988). Effectiveness of a concept teaching routine in enhancing the performance of LD students in secondary-level mainstream classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11(1), 3-17.
About the Author
Janis Bulgren, Ph.D.
Affliations
- Associate Research Scientist
- University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning
- Courtesy Assistant Professor
- Department of Special Education
- University of Kansas
My Background and Interests
The focus of my research has been developing ways to help adolescents, including those with disabilities, succeed in inclusive general education classes. Having two degrees in English and teaching at the high school level for several years made me very aware of the needs of both teachers and students in diverse subject-area classes. This led to me to pursue a degree in special education from the University of Kansas. My combined background of general education and special education has allowed me to pursue my interests and insights about how teachers teach and how students learn. As a result, I have been privileged to work with teachers in a variety of subject areas and to do research on instructional techniques that support all students, including those who are low achieving, average achieving, and high achieving, as well as students with disabilities.
My focus has been on a programmatic line of research that builds upon a foundation of knowledge of factual information to create an understanding of critical concepts, to enable manipulation of information including making comparisons, analyzing causes and effects, weighing options to make decisions, and using reasoning to analyze claims and arguments. The goal of the instructional practices that my colleagues and I have designed is to guide students as they engage in deep learning and comprehension across subject-area domains and ultimately in the generalization of thinking to subject-area and real-world issues.
The Story Behind the Concept Mastery Routine
As I taught language arts and literature, I realized that teachers, and I am including myself in that group, often made assumptions about the common knowledge and understandings shared by all members of a class. This was particularly true for understandings about concepts, such as “tragedy” or “conflict.” I began to understand that students’ lack of common prior knowledge and shared understanding often made all the hard work that teachers put into instruction less effective than might be. This understanding led me to explore information associated with concepts, such as “tragedy,” that could be used to establish a common ground of understanding. Digging into the literature helped me clarify the importance of teaching students about characteristics or attributes associated with a concept as well as about examples and non-examples of a concept. I also learned the importance of exploring the prior knowledge of each student in the class, building a hierarchy of concept clusters, and developing good definitions for concepts based on shared understandings.
My findings from the literature provided the “spark” for the development of the Concept Mastery Routine and ultimately for a line of research that reflected progression along a taxonomic hierarchy of thinking — a hierarchy often reflected in content-area learning demands. The Content Enhancement Routines that our research team has developed respond to students’ needs relative to such skills as acquisition and retention of factual information, deep understanding of single critical concepts, ability to compare and contrast two or more concepts, ability to learn a new concept by analogy to a known concept, and ability to answer a critical question.
My thoughts about Content Enhancement Instruction
Working initially on the importance of deep understanding of critical concepts, I became more and more aware of key principles that became the foundation for all the Content Enhancement Routines. Among these are that the teacher and students must be partners in learning, and that learning must be as interactive and co-constructive as possible given the large numbers of students in content classes. I also became very aware of the importance of focusing on critical information and concepts that would be used again and again. Furthermore, the wide range of students’ abilities, interests, and needs in subject-area classes underscored the notion innovative instruction is needed to help all students succeed.
Teacher Feedback on the Concept Comparison Routine
One of the most insightful (and rewarding) pieces of feedback on this routine has come from many teachers – who were all saying the same thing. They reported that the process of planning to teach with the Concept Diagram and the Concept Mastery Routine provided them with a real sense of accomplishment in that they achieved a greater understanding of the material than they had had before. Although many of them had taught the same concept over many years, they reported that the depth and thoroughness of the analysis of a concept promoted by the Concept Diagram was invaluable to them. When they, as teachers, had a deeper understanding of a concept, they were able to confidently answer any student questions, elicit student’s prior knowledge, and plan extension activities to assure themselves and their students of deep comprehension of that critical concept.
replica watches uk, cartier replica watches, tag heuer replica
Contact Information
Please contact me through Edge Enterprises, Inc. (877-767-1487).
