Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education

Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)

SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

ENHANCING MATHEMATICS KNOWLEDGE AND PROCESS SKILLS OF

STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES

a
Poon Cheng-Yong
b
Yeo Kee-Jiar
c
Noor Azlan Ahmad Zanzali

a
Institut Pendidikan Guru Kampus Tun Abdul Razak bcUniversiti
Teknologi Malaysia

a
[Link]@[Link]
b
kjyeo@[Link] cazanzali@[Link]

Abstract: Explicit instruction is commonly used for helping students with mathematics
learning difficulties. However, some research findings indicate that students’ mastery of
conceptual understanding and mathematical process skills was often ignored if this approach
was used solely. This research was aimed to investigate the teaching and learning processes
during a remedial intervention The intervention was carried out using a mixed instructional
approach which combined the perspective of the behaviorists and constructivists. It was
expected to enhance the mathematical knowledge and process skills of students. A case study
research design was employed. Data was collected and analyzed using a qualitative approach.
Results showed that the students were able to improve their mathematics conceptual and
procedural knowledge, and mathematical process skills through active interaction and mind-
on activities. During the intervention, the teacher used explicit instruction for introduction
and followed by student hands-on activities and reflection. The students were actively involved
in mathematical processes to make sense and interact with their peers and teacher. However,
they still experienced stress when they were required to perform active thinking and
demonstration using manipulative and drawing. Wait time and continous support from teacher
were needed for them to complete the task. In short, students with mathematics learning
difficulties could enhance their mathematics knowledge and process skills through a mixed
instructional approach.
Keywords: Mathematical process skills, Mathematics Remedial Intervention, Mixed
Instructional Approach

INTRODUCTION Lacking of experiences in active sense-making

Many researchers suggested that students with might cause them to continue encountering
learning difficulties in mathematics should be difficulties in mathematics learning.
provided with diagnostic and remediation Mathematics remediation programs in
approaches to instruction (Flores, 2009; Bryant et Malaysia aim to develop automacy among students
al., 2008; Fuchs et al., 2008; Tournaki, 2003; Fuchs with learning difficulties so that they can solve
and Fuchs, 2001; Mercer and Miller, 1992). problems and continue their study in regular
Through practices such as drill-and-practice and classroom (Jabatan Pendidikan Khas, 2003).
explicit instruction, mathematics intervention was Although conceptual understanding is emphasized,
found effective in improving arithmetic skills of teaching and learning materials are separated from
these students. However, these approaches might authentic mathematical processes which are
involve students in learning activities that foster emphasized by the national mathematics curriculum
over-reliance on prescriptive pedagogies that (Malaysia Ministry of Education, 2010). To learn
prevent them from acquistion of conceptual knowledge and skills of mathematics at higher level,
understanding and mathematical process skills apart from strong conceptual understanding and
(Moscardini, 2009; Ketterlin-Geller et al., 2008). procedural knowledge, students should also master
mathematical process skills before they are
confident and fluent in application of their
mathematical knowledge.

386
DOI : [Link]
Published by [Link]
© 2017 SEAMEO SEN
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

Instructional practices in the mathematics skills, based on the instructional model

remediation classrooms were mainly focused on developed in this research.
acquisition of basic facts and arithmatic skills (Poon In order to understand the teaching and
et al., 2012; Gan and Poon, 2008). Research findings learning process during usual practice and remedial
show that teachers usually practice explicit intervention, the researchers applied a qualitative
instruction and drill-and-practice approach based on research approach (Creswell, 2008). The researchers
text-book problems. Obviously, emphasis on planned instructional activities together with the
procedural knowledge influenced the purpose and participating teacher in an effort to enhance teaching
use of instructional practices. and learning of mathematics using a mixed
instructional approach. This research method
Research Purpose enabled the researchers to explore how a teacher
This research was intended to investigate a coherent could enhance the teaching and learning in
instructional approach which is based on individual mathematics remediation classroom, and thus
learner needs and contextual circumstances for construct a model for instruction in mathematics
effective learning in the mathematics remediation remedial intervention.
classrooms. It was based on the perspective of a
teacher’s instructional approach rather than the Instructional Approach
perspective of students towards learning. For the remedial intervention of this research, the
As indicated by research findings, some researcher proposed the use of two different
students are used to learning in a structured and instructional approaches in a mixed mode. Teachers
teacher-directed environment (Poon et al., 2012; could adjust their instructional approach according
Gan and Poon, 2008; Flores, 2009a; Bryant et al., to the existing knowledge and experiences of their
2008; Fuchs et al., 2008; Tournaki, 2003; Fuchs and students. Usually, instruction in the remediation
Fuchs, 2001; Mercer and Miller, 1992). According classroom is based on the behaviourist framework
to Moscardini (2009), some students might show of learning (Bryant et al., 2008; Fuchs and Fuchs,
improvement in arithmetic skills but they persist 2001; Mercer and Miller, 1992). To help students
with primitive strategy in solving arithmetic acquire mathematical process skills, teacher may
problems at the expense of development in their have to change this approach to a constructivist
mathematical thinking (Moscardini, 2009). In an approach to instruction (Cawley and Parmar, 1992).
effort to change the mathematics remediation Behavioural learning theory was found
classroom which is dominated by rules, formulae effective in helping students mastering basic
and computation, to one that focuses on knowledge and skills in mathematics. For this
sensemaking of mathematical concepts and research, the researchers referred to ‘operant
procedures, the researchers investigated the learning’ which assumes a more active learner
teaching and learning process during usual (O’Donnell et al., 2007). It is commonly used in
mathematics remediation classroom. Through classroom teaching and learning in order to produce
careful observations and interviews with the meaningful behavioural changes. Explicit and direct
participating teacher and students, the researchers instruction is usually used in remedation of
developed activities for remedial intervention. The mathematics (Joyce et al., 2009) on the development
researchers continued investigation on learning of of arithmetic skills. It is a model of teaching which
mathematical knowledge and process skills through emphasizes teachers’ control in classroom activities.
a mixed instructional approach in a remedial The activities are structured and consist of
intervention. The instructional approach included explanation and demonstration by a teacher,
the behaviorist and constructivist approaches. structured practice, and guided practice. After a
In short, the researchers sought to understand teacher presents a particular concept or skill,
the current instructional practice, and subsequently students are expected to carry out practices by
develop a model of instruction, and carry it out in following the steps shown by their teacher. This
mathematics remedial intervention. The objectives model is found effective in teaching basic skills such
of this research are as follow: as reading, writing and arithmetic to students with
(i) investigate the usual learning difficulties (Joyce et al., 2009; Gurganus,
practice in mathematics remediation 2007).
classroom On the other hand, constructivist approach of
(ii) develop an instructional model teaching and learning is greatly influenced by the
for mathematics remedial intervention, and ideas of Piaget and Vygotsky (Slavin, 2009). Piaget
(iii) explore the enhancement of students’ proposed the theory of cognitive development and
mathematical knowledge and process stages of development to explain human cognitive
development and learning while Vygotsky

387
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

suggested ‘zone of proximal development’ to knowledge develops optimally if both are

explain that. Mathematics learning is particularly emphasized during teaching and learning process.
related to the constructivist philosophy which Acquisition of conceptual knowledge can facilitate
promotes hands-on activities and active student learning of mathematical symbols and procedures.
interactions in a meaningful context with Likewise, when students become proficient in their
scaffolding of understanding. For mathematics procedural knowledge, they have more cognitive
instruction in the primary grades, Slavin (2009) resources to help them in construction of conceptual
suggested student working together in small groups understanding. Reys et al. (2007) suggested that
to solve real-life problems. In the problem-solving students should be involved in active thinking
process, a teacher facilitates the discussion of during problem solving process, not merely
strategies in finding the solution. Students are memorizing standard procedures or learning
encouraged to reflect on the problem and think about through rote learning.
several alternative solutions before deciding the
final solution.
Both behavioural and constructivist learning Mathematical Process Skills
theories bring implications to teaching and learning As intended in the national mathematics curriculum
practices in the mathematics classrooms. As (Malaysia Ministry of Education, 2010),
mentioned by Gurganus (2007), students with mathematical processes include communication,
learning difficulties might have problems with reasoning, making connection, problem solving, and
indirect approaches such as the constructivist making representation. National Council of
approach. Systematic and explicit instruction could Teachers of Mathematics (2000) highlights the
be used to support the limitation of constructivist active vision of learning and doing mathematics
approach. For gaining conceptual and procedural through these processes as they are fundamental in
knowledge, a constructivist approach to instruction engaging students actively to make sense of
is appropriate. However, explicit instruction might mathematics. These processes also provide a
help students o become fluent with knowledge and philosophical base for our mathematics teachers in
skills. Students come into the classroom with a approaching teaching of mathematics.
variety of previous experiences and knowledge. Polya’s model of problem solving forms the
They need different instructional approaches in the basis for solving mathematical problems in the
process of constructing understanding. Some might national curriculum (Malaysia Ministry of
learn mathematics through an indirect approach Education, 2010). Using this model, students are
while others might need more explicit and expected to carry out the steps in the sequence of
systematic instruction. Thus, the main challenge in interpreting the problem, planning a strategy,
this research was to help students with learning implementing the strategy, and examining the
difficulties improve their conceptual understanding solution. Though, this model alone will not help the
and process skills without ignoring their individual students to solve a problem if they could not apply
differences and needs. any problem solving strategy to execute the steps.
Students should make a decision in choosing from a
Mathematical Knowledge list of problem solving strategies such as trying a
For proficiency in mathematics, delivery of simple case, trial and improvement, drawing a
conceptual and procedural knowlege should be diagram, and constructing a table. Generally,
emphasized. These two types of knowledge are reasoning consists of inductive approach and
intertwined. Thus, students with learning difficulties deductive approach (Reys et al., 2007). Inductive
should learn the meaningful connections between reasoning involves generating general rules based
them (Reys et al,, 2007; Van de Walle, 2001). on specific examples. On the contrary, deductive
Conceptual knowledge consists of logical and inter- reasoning requires students to apply a general rule
related relations that exist as part of a network of to specific examples. As inductive reasoning is
ideas and connected meanings in a person’s mind. It emphasized in the view of constructivist approach,
is found that understanding of conceptual teachers could guide students to develop their own
knowledge can enhance students’ proficiency in rules and generalizations which they will use to
mathematical procedures. Mathematics procedural solve other problems.
knowledge is understanding about rules and Communication in mathematics can occur
procedures in doing mathematical tasks (Van de through listening, reading, and visualization
Walle, 2001). (Malaysia Ministry of Education, 2003). Students
Rittle-Johnson and Koedinger (2009) are expected to respond to what they hear, collect
affirmed the interactive relationship between the information and reorganize the relationship between
two types of knowledge. These two types of mathematical ideas, and transforming the

388
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

information into graphic forms. According to the remediation teacher, Mr. Harris, who was assigned
national curriculum (Malaysia Ministry of to the mathematics remediation program of that
Education, 2003), students should be involved in school. To select participating students, the
oral and written communication during instructional researchers designed a screening test that includes
activities. Apart from that, students also should learn knowledge and skills in addition and subtraction.
to represent mathematical ideas in various forms. This test was adminstered among all the students in
Hence, these modes of communication should be Year 3 of the school. As a result, five students who
emphasized in planning mathematics remedial failed in the screening test were chosen as research
intervention. participants. A better understanding of the students
According to Reys et al. (2007), students was carried out before planning instructional
should learn to make connections among activities for the remediation intervention. They
mathematical ideas. Students also should learn the went through diagnostic procedures to enable the
relations among mathematical symbols and researchers obtain knowledge of their strength and
procedures, and the related conceptual ideas. Apart weaknesses. Five instructional sessions were
from that, students could explore the relations planned and implemented during the project. To
between mathematics and its application in real help students in acquiring knowledge of addition of
world or other school subjects. During problem whole numbers, the researchers planned
solving activities, students could become more instructional activities for students to learn the
conscious in the application of mathematics in their critical skills in the sequence of ‘meaning of
real life. addition’, ‘basic addition facts’, and ‘computation
Mathematics offers a rich repertoire in and algorithm’. It is important to learn the
representing and communicating ideas (Reys et al., knowledge and skills in sequence as mathematical
2007). Through making representation of a knowledge consists of an inter-related system of
mathematical idea, students are led to think in concepts and operations that are hierarchically
various ways. They could invent their own ways to organized (Van de Walle, 2001). The remedial
communicate ideas beside working with intervention discussed in this article, one of
conventional representations. Generally, students activities in the fifth session, is a part of a research
could represent mathematical ideas in the form of project. In this activity, the researchers focused on
written symbol, spoken language, real-world the teaching and learning of ‘addition with
situation, manipulative, and picture. To understand regrouping’ using straws. All the sessions
a mathematical idea, students should learn to select, were aimed at improving knowledge and skills in
apply, and translate among representations. In addition of whole numbers for students who were
this research, the researchers investigated how chosen as participants of this research. Every
students who were assigned to the mathematics session of the remedial lesson was recorded using
remediation program could be helped to learn the video camera. Data collected through observation
above mathematical process skills. If remediation was analyzed to enable the researchers understand
programs aim at helping students to continue the behaviours of the research participants
learning mathematics in the regular classroom and (Creswell, 2008). The product of observation during
at the higher level, acquisition of these skills should the remedial intervention was focused at the
not be ignored. instructional approaches used by the teacher. The
researchers also collected data from the students to
RESEARCH METHOD understand their learning of mathematical
This research was aimed at seeking understanding of knowledge and process skills. Semi structured
the teaching process of a teacher who intended to interviews with remedial teacher and students after
practice an instructional approach which is based on instruction were carried out by researchers. The
the constructivist learning theories. It was not aimed researchers interviewed the participants in order to
at testing the effectiveness of the instruction towards understand their perceptions and thought (Creswell,
mathematics learning. Hence, a case study research 2008). This instrument also enabled the researchers
design (Creswell, 2008) was used to understand the to further understand the behaviours of these
process of teaching and learning. Besides obtaining participants.
an in-depth understanding of the effect of Creswell (2008) suggested that researchers
intervention designed by the researchers, it also should find information from documents to help
enabled the researchers to reflect on that process. them understand the central phenomena in their
Participants of this research were selected qualitative studies. The documents used in this
from a school located at the suburban area. Most of research included students’ work and school
the students in this school were native and weak in documents such as attendance report and students’
mathematics. The researchers involved a personal record. Students’ work which was
examined includes their drawing and work sheets. It

389
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

helped the researchers to obtain understanding on were quiet observing their teacher’s explanation and
their learning process and acquisition of demonstration. However, when they were required
mathematical knowledge as well as process skills. to finish their exercise questions, some of them often
The researchers could understand their responses to sought guidance from Mr. Harris as they were not
the content delivered, the use of instructional confident of their answers or encountered
strategy and approach during the remedial difficulties. The students often failed to identify
intervention. The researchers identified the video their error and make correction. In guiding the
clips taken during observation and also related students who encountered difficulties, Mr. Harris
interview session in order to gain a clearer picture of asked them to use their fingers, straws or drawing
the context under which the work was produced. segments to show the value of the addends. All the
In this research, three analysis strategies were students counted the objects one by one to find the
applied. The first strategy was to do coding for the sum. Afterward, when the researchers asked the
whole teaching and learning process. In order to students to explain the math sentence they had
understand this process, transcripts of video and completed, they still faced difficulties in
interview were coded using the coding scheme representing the math sentence by using objects or
developed from literature review of this research. A story. Others preferred to copy answers from their
big quantity of data was obtained. The analysis ‘brighter peers’.
process was conducted based on the principles
suggested by Creswell (2008). It involved Remedial intervention
transcribing, segmenting, coding, creating themes, In learning the concepts and procedures for addition
and inter-relating themes. After every segment with regrouping, the students solved problems using
in the transcript was labeled with a code, the related concrete materials. To start the activity, Mr. Harris
video clip was identified. Analysis towards the explained to the students that each straw represent a
conversation in the video clips was carried out at the can of drink and on how to use straws to represent
micro level. This stategy was meant for concept of place value. For example, to represent
investigating interaction between two or more ‘17’, he showed a bundle of ten straws, and seven
samples. It enabled the researchers to identify units of straws. After his explanation, each student
contexts, important matters related to the research was required to use straws in representing an
objectives, and the sample’s facial expression, arithmetic problem, and thus solving it. All the
behavior or gesture. problems involved addition of a two-digit number
To obtain a holistic understanding of the and another two-digit number, with regrouping. As
students’ work such as drawings and work sheets, this process involved regrouping, Mr. Harris
the researchers compared the students’ work with explained how to regroup the straws by drawing
the related video clips of classroom observation. It segments for ’17 + 5’, and drawing a big circle for
enabled the researchers to understand the conditions the first ten segments. He explained that the big
under which the students produce their work. circle represented the action of tying ten straws into
a bundle.
Results Usual remediation classroom After each demonstration, the students
The participating teacher, Mr. Harris, planned his represented the problem by writing a math sentence
teaching and learning activities by referring to the in horizontal form and its standard written form. Mr.
guidebook provided by the Malaysia Ministry of Harris also posed questions to challenge each
Education. To explain and demonstrate steps in student make connection between every numeral in
solving arithmetic problems involving addition, he the standard written form and their demonstration.
used questions from reference books. After his Nasrah prepared two bundles and nine pink
explicit demonstration, he asked his students to straws to represent ‘29’, and a bundle plus nine
solve routine problems by following the steps he had green straws to represent ‘19’. After she stopped and
demonstrated. In average, for every one-hour lesson, thought for a while, she continued to count ten
his students were required to finish four sets of straws and exhanged that for a bundle of straws from
worksheet where there were six questions in each Mr. Harris. Finally, she showed 4 bundles and 8
set. During student-practice, Mr. Harris provided units of straws as the total. The researchers noticed
explicit explanation to students who encountered that she was confident in using count-on in twos
difficulties. His explanation was explicit and fast as technique that she learned from previous sessions.
he wanted to attend to every student who asked for During the whole demonstration, Nasrah was quiet
his help. and did not explain her actions although Mr. Harris
There were five students who needed help to asked her to. Later, Nasrah represented ‘29 + 19’ in
improve their knowledge and skills in addition of standard written form and computed the answer
whole number. During the usual classroom, they correctly by retrieving the related basic addition

390
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

facts that she had learned. She checked her answer of the work of Nasrah, Hafiz and Farib. Next, she
by comparing it with the total number of straws on was asked to perform her demonstration. After
the table although she was not required to. preparing two groups of straws for the addends, she
Afterward, Mr. Harris challenged waited for instruction from Mr. Harris as she could
Nasrah to identify the straws that represented ’20 of not perform the regrouping and trading process. Mr.
29’, ’10 of 19’, and the ’10 of regrouping’ by Harris immediately guided her explicitly to
referring to her answer in the standard written form. complete the demonstration as this was the ‘usual
Nasrah managed to answer correctly although she practice of him and Fatimah’. He assumed that
found this activity challenging for her. According to Fatimah was a weak student. Afterward, Fatimah
her, she was quiet because she wanted to concentrate failed to identify the numeral in her standard written
on her demonstration. Like Nasrah, Hafiz form for the straws that represented the bundle she
also managed to perform his demonstration and got from regrouping and trading. In view of her
computation correctly and quietly. Hafiz used problem, Mr. Harris immediately and explicitly
count-on technique in his demonstration. He also explained the connection between the regrouping of
answered correctly all the questions from Mr. Harris the straws and her computation to her. She was
that required him to make connections between his unable to perform the regrouping process by using
demonstration and computation. He explained to the straws for the subsequent question. In fact, Fatimah
researchers that he could not explain during his only managed to acquire this skill when she was
demonstration because he needed to concentrate and given chance to think and play with the straws
think. He also found that solving the problem herself after the activity.
through computation was easier than that of Najib was given the question, ’16 + 9’, and
demonstration because he only needed to follow managed to complete the computation immediately
fixed procedure in completing his computation. For but he failed to perform the demonstration. To help
demonstration, he needed to plan and think him, Mr. Harris gave him explicit instruction as he
carefully. Farib completed his demonstration thought Najib was a weak student. Afterward, Najib
for ‘17 + managed to identify the related straws and explain
16’ correctly but made a mistake in his computation. for every numeral in the standard written form
He retrieved the basic addition fact of ‘7 + 6 = 13’ without any difficulty. He explained to the
from his memory but wrote ‘1’ at the ones and researchers that he understood the concepts and
carried ‘30’ to the tens. Thus, his final answer was procedures after Mr. Harris had given explicit
‘51’. Obviously, he had performed a wrong demonstration and explanation. Both Fatimah
procedure as he did not relate it to the concept of and Najib liked learning by using manipulative
place value and regrouping. Without any reminder because the activities were fun. However, they were
from Mr. Harris, Farib compared his written answer confused and stressed because they could not
and the total number of straws, and thus realized that observe or perform any demonstration and think
the two answers were different. After checking his concurrently. Fatimah said she could not think of
answer by repeating the demonstration of straws, he any related concept and procedure when she was
checked his written answer but failed to identify his observing or performing any demonstration. Najib
error. thought the demonstration by Mr. Harris helped him
To help Farib, Mr. Harris guided him to create to understand problem-contexts and thus make
a ‘place value board’ on the table by putting a pencil connections to related concepts. However,
box as a divider between the place value of tens and performing demonstration and thinkig concurrently
of ones. After that, Farib arranged a bundle and was difficult for him because he got mentally tired
seven pink straws, and a bundle and six green easily.
straws, according to their place value correctly on
the ‘place value board’. Farib continued to take all Discussion Instructional approach
the seven green straws and three of the pink straws For usual practice, Mr. Harris used explicit
in order to tie them together. When he put this demonstration and guided practice for students to
bundle of straws at the tens, Mr. Harris asked Farib improve their procedural skills in addition of whole
to compute ‘7 + 6’ again. Farib compared his work number with regrouping in his mathematics
in standard written form and the arrangement of the remediation classroom. During remedial
straws. He thought for a while and finally wrote the intervention, Mr. Harris used explicit instruction to
‘1 of 13’ at the tens and the ‘3 of 13’ at the ones. explain the concept of place value initially and
Thus, he managed to correct his mistake. After gradually changed to a more student-centered
Mr. Harris showed ‘19 + 14’ to Fatimah, she approach when he asked the students to demonstrate
completed the computation correctly. She told the and compute for questions involving addition with
researchers that she did it based on her observations regrouping. Regarding response to students who

391
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

encountered difficulties in a task, Mr. Harris gave without giving them sufficient time to think and try
explicit instruction to the less-able students again. After his explicit instruction, Najib
immediately but he let the more-able student such as understood the related concepts and was able to use
Farib to explore and make sense. Although his understanding in making connection between the
Mr. Harris intended to change his instructional demonstration and computation. However, Fatimah
approach and assumed that students with learning still failed to understand the demonstration as she
difficulties could explore and make sense, he still experienced difficulties in listening to explanation
employed a more teacher-centered approach when and thinking at the same time. It might be a
the less-able students encountered difficulties or cognitive burden (Mayer, 2008) to her. Furthermore,
made mistakes. As Mr. Harris and his students were she was pushed to understand in a limited period of
used to the behaviourist framework of learning time, and this might be a pressure for her.
(Bryant et al., 2008; Fuchs and Fuchs, 2001; Mercer
and Miller, 1992), the teacher and the students In this remedial intervention, students were
needed more time to get used to constructivist given opportunities to understand the meaning of
approach. addition and regrouping based on their
understanding of the set model for addition. They
Acquisition of mathematical knowledge applied their knowledge of the part-part-whole
The findings indicated that the more-able students relation in addition, and learned about the relation
such as Nasrah and Hafiz had shown improvement between the ones and the tens, and the trading
in understanding of concepts such as the meaning processes, in place value. Apart from that, they were
and mathematical relations in addition with given the opportunity to learn about the symbols, the
regrouping, and acquired computational skills, after horizontal and vertical forms of math sentence. In
participating in the remedial intervention. Before the performing their computation, the students had to
intervention, they relied on counting all the objects retrieve basic addition facts from their memory or
one by one in order to find the sum. During the by using their fact-retrieval strategy. Generally, they
diagnostic test, they failed to solve arithmetic needed to perform the algorithm for addition with
problems as they were not provided with any regrouping. Therefore, their learning of concepts
concrete objects. and procedures of addition with regrouping
From the observations of their more-able involved conceptual knowledge and procedural
peers, Farib, Fatimah and Najib managed to learn knowledge concurrently. Their learning of math
the computational skills by following the procedures knowledge was different from that of the usual
but they still encountered difficulties in performing practice where they merely perform a procedure
either the demonstration or computation. In Farib’s demonstrated by their teacher without sufficient
case, initially he did not think about the concepts, understanding. This finding is consistent with the
and hence failed to identify his mistake, particularly affirmation from Rittle-Johnson and Koedinger
regarding the place value concept. Guidance from (2009) that the interactive relationship between the
Mr. Harris to use the ‘place value board’ was a hint two types of knowledge would help each other to
for Farib. It helped Farib to see the connections develops optimally if both are emphasized during
between the concept illustrated by the straws and his teaching and learning process
computation in standard written form. Mr. Harris
assumed that Farib was a more-able student and thus Acquisition of mathematical process skills
he allowed him to think and correct his answer During the explicit explanation in the usual
himself. classroom and the intervention, the students only
Fatimah and Najib were able to complete the observed and listened. They were not required to
computation task by simply following the steps practice any of the process skills. Their responses in
performed by their peers but that did not mean they answering practice questions during usual practice
understood the related concepts. By merely showed that there was a lack of understanding in
observing demonstrations of their peers, they still their learning. Even if they were using objects in
failed to represent the concept of regrouping through helping their computation, they were not required to
manipulation of straws. In fact, these students make sense. For instance, they merely followed the
needed to understand why and how the straws were steps explained by their teacher to find the sum.
regrouped. When they made mistakes, they immediately sought
Farib was given more opportunity to find out help from their teacher for correction without trying
the concepts if compared to Fatimah and Najib who to check their answer and identify the error. They
were given explicit instruction. When Fatimah and also failed to explain the relation between their
Najib failed to perform a task, Mr. Harris tended to written work and the regrouping of the objects.
explain the concepts and steps to them explicitly

392
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

However, when Mr. Harris used a more understand mathematics conceptual and
student-centered approach in the remedial procedural knowledge if they were supported to
intervention, the students were offered more make sense. Explicit instruction was needed for the
opportunities to practice their process skills. students to understand prerequisite knowledge
Obviously, Nasrah, Hafiz and Farib were required to such as place value before the students could use
think when they performed their demonstration to it to solve problems involving regrouping. When
solve the arithmetic problem. Post intervention the students had the prerequisite knowledge, they
interviews with these students showed that they could use it to make sense of mathematics and thus
actually planned before they carried out the practice their process skills in an environment
demonstration. Thus, the demonstration was more supported by the constructivist perspective.
challenging for the students. The researchers also Teacher’s support and trust were crucial. In cases
observed that they checked and compared their where the students experienced cognitive burden,
answers from demonstration and computation. they actually needed more time to think and make
Through their answers to questions posed by Mr. sense. Immediate instruction from their teacher
Harris afterward, the researchers found that the hampered them from thinking and doing
students understood the connections between the mathematics.
steps in their demonstration and that of their
computation. They also understood the reason of REFERENCE
doing regrouping in both processes. In terms of Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., Gersten, R.,
making representation, they were able to transform Scammacca, N. & Chavez, M.M. (2008).
the math sentence into a concrete representation Mathematics Intervention for First- and
through action. However, they did not show their Second-Grade Students with Mathematics
oral communication skill during the demonstration Difficulties: The Effects of Tier 2 Intervention
as they needed to focus on thinking. In answering Delivered as Booster Lessons. Remedial and
questions from Mr. Harris, they tended to point to Special Education. 29 (1), 20–32.
the numerals in their written work or the straws Cawley, J.F. & Parmar, R.S.(1992). Arithmetic
without any oral explanation. Programming for Students with Disabilities: An
Fatimah and Najib were not active in making Alternative. Remedial and Special
sense if compare to their peers. Immediate and Education. 13(3), 6–18.
explicit instruction offered by Mr. Harris seemed Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational Research :
to demotivate them from sense making. Najib Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating
could understand the concepts from his teacher’s Quantitative and Qualitative Research. (3rd
explanation but he still might fail to demonstrate ed.). New Jersey : Pearson Education, Inc.
and explain the regrouping process. Questions after Flores, M. M. (2009). Using the
explicit explanation managed to trigger his ConcreteRepresentational-Abstract Sequence
thinking process and thus helped him to understand to Teach Subtraction With Regrouping to
the related mathematical ideas. For Fatimah, Students at Risk for Failure. Remedial and
obviously she needed sufficient time to think and Special Education. 31 (3), 195–207.
learn, and a lot of opportunities and support to Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P.
solve problems independently. The learning M., Cirino, P. T. & Fletcher, J. M. (2008).
processes of Nasrah, Hafiz and Farib were found Intensive Intervention For Students With
consistent with the suggestion of Gurganus (2007) Mathematics Disabilities: Seven Principles of
that students with learning difficulties might have Effective Practice. Learning Disability
problems with indirect approaches such as the Quarterly. 31, 79–92.
constructivist approach. However, explicit Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. (2001). Principles for the
instruction could be used to support the limitation Prevention and Intervention of Mathematics
of constructivist approach. In comparison to these Difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research
students, Fatimah and Najib were not offered the and Practice. 16, 85–95.
opportunity to learn in a constructivist Gan, T.H. & Poon, C.Y. To Push or Not to Push,
environment. Thus, they were limited from making That’s the Question: Exploring Ways to Help
sense of mathematics and learning the process Sarawakian Pupils Learn Mathematics.
skills. Proceedings of the Indigenous Pedagogies in
Diverse Cultural Contexts: Issues, Challenges
CONCLUSION and Opportunities. 10–12 November 2008.
Through investigation in the usual classroom and Malaysia: Teacher Education Division, 88–
remedial intervention, obviously the students with 96.
math learning difficulties had shown their ability to

393
 Proceedings of the International Conference on Special Education
Vol.2 (2017) / e-ISSN 2948-4731 (386-394)
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Special Educational Needs

Gurganus, S.P. (2007). Math Instruction for Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council
Students with Learning Problems. (1st ed.). of Teachers of Mathematics.
Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. O’Donnell, A.M., Reeve, J. & Smith, J.K. (2007).
Jabatan Pendidikan Khas (JPK) (2003). Buku Educational psychology: reflection for action.
Panduan Pelaksanaan Program Pemulihan Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Khas (Masalah Penguasaan 3M). Malaysia: Poon Cheng-Yong, Yeo Kee-Jiar & Noor Azlan
Jabatan Pendidikan Khas. Ahmad Zanzali (2012). Mathematics
Joyce, B., Weil, M. & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models remediation for indegenous students with
of Teaching. (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson learning difficulties: Does it work? US-China
Education, Inc. Education Review. 2 (12), 1022–1033.
Ketterlin-Geller, L.R., Chard, D.J. & Fien, H. Reys, R.E., Lindquist, M.M., Lambdin, D.V. &
(2008). Making Connections in Mathematics: Smith, N.L. (2007). Helping Pupils Learn
Conceptual Mathematics Intervention for Low- Mathematics. (8th ed.). New Jersey: John
Performing Students. Remedial and Special Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Education. 29 (1), 33–45. Rittle-Johnson, B. & Koedinger, K. (2009).
Malaysia Ministry of Education (2010). Kurikulum Iterating between lessons on concepts and
Standard Sekolah Rendah: Matematik Tahun procedures can improve mathematics
Satu. Malaysia: Ministry of Education knowledge. British Journal of Educational
Malaysia. Psychology. 79, 483–500.
Ministry of Education Malaysia (2003). Integrated Slavin, R.E. (2009). Educational Psychology :
Curriculum for Primary School: Curriculum Theory and Practice. (9th ed.). Upper Saddle
Specifications Mathematics Year 2. Malaysia: River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Ministry of Education Malaysia. Tournaki, N. (2003). The Differential Effects of
Mercer, C.D. & Miller, S.P. (1992). Teaching Teaching Addition Through Strategy
Students with Learning Problems in Math to Instruction Versus Drill and Practice to
Acquire, Understand, and Apply Basic Math Students With and Without Learning
Facts. Remedial and Special Education. 13 (3), Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
19–35. 36 (5), 449–458.
Moscardini, L. (2009). Tools or crutches? Van de Walle, J.A. (2001). Elementery and Middle
Apparatus as a sense-making aid in School Mathematics: Teaching
mathematics teaching with children with Developmentally. (4th ed.). New York, NY:
moderate learning difficulties. Support for Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Learning. 24 (1), 35–41.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(2000). Principles and Standards for School

394