In order to explore the implementation of remedial instruction and teachers’
perceptions of the remedial instruction policies in Taiwan, this literature review is divided into three sections. The first section presents different kinds of underachievers.
The second section is related to remedial instruction in general, including curriculum design, teaching methods, materials, and evaluation. The third section introduces the remedial instruction policies in the U.S., the U.K., and Taiwan. Studies on investigating the implementation of the remedial instruction in Taiwan are included in the third section.
Types of Underachievers
In school, it is not difficult to find students having low learning motivation, resisting to class activities, scoring poor grades in class, or holding negative attitudes toward schools. Some of them are unable to catch up with others because of their own limited abilities or intelligence, while others lag behind because they receive fewer learning resources owing to low socioeconomic statuses of their families. Reasons for causing underachievement are varied and complicated. In order to help people to understand underachievement, Otto and Smith (1980) divided underachievers into six categories. However, they emphasized that these six categories were not mutually exclusive.
10
Underachievers with Average Capacity
When students’ intelligence and abilities are within average range but they fail to reach their chronological grade-placement level, they are regarded as underachievers.
These students, first of all, have some learning difficulties which cause their failure to attain goals at certain level. Without proper instruction, the constant failure they experience leads to frustration. The frustration then leads to mental problems, which interfere with their attempt to learn or create more frustration. Therefore, the learning problems of underachievers with average capacity are chronic. This type of students is usually the target of remedial instruction.
Slow Learners
Many schools offer special programs to assist students who fail to reach their school levels, and they believe that after receiving the special help, all of the students can reach the school levels. Nevertheless, grade level, sometimes, is not a good standard for assessment of underachievement. For students whose IQ scores are between 90 and 110, if they can not achieve their school levels, they are regarded as an underachiever. However, if students whose IQ score is between 75 and 90, even when they fail to reach the school levels, they probably have achieved the limit of their abilities. These students should be called slow learners. Some slow learners who have not attained the limit of their abilities still need remedial instruction. Most slow learners enter schools when they are physically mature but mentally immature, so they fail to acquire basic learning skills and usually fall into “the cycle of failure-frustration-more failure-greater frustration”(Otto & Smith, 1980). What these learners need is a program that can follow their learning speed and help them to achieve to the degree their abilities can reach.
11
Bright Underachievers
Different from slow learners, some students that pass the school levels may still be underachievers. This type of students has high IQ and is able to perform beyond their chronological school levels, but their performances in school are merely adequate. The problem of these students is that they avoid high-risk tasks and only ask for passing exams. In the long run, they will not know their potential and learning problems.
Reluctant Learners
Reluctant learners refer to students who do not fully participate and function in the classroom because of lack of motivation. Normally, these students’ intelligence and abilities are within average range. If teachers provide individualized instruction and arouse their interest in learning, they are able to use knowledge and skills they learn to fulfill the goals.
Children with Limited Experiential Background
With development of technology, learning is no longer limited in time and space.
Some students, however, still have difficulties in learning due to disadvantaged learning conditions and insufficient learning resources. Compared with their counterparts, these students receive little stimuli from their surroundings. They need special assistance in advance, or they are easily caught in vicious circle of learned helplessness.
12
Children with Limited Language Development
A person’s language development is largely related to his or her background.
Lack of proper language development will greatly influence both students’ academic learning and interaction with classmates. This type of students is also in need of timely individualized instruction to avoid more complex learning problems.
It is true that underachievers have some learning problems, but they are quite different from students with learning disability. Though they have several overlapping characteristics, underachievers refer to those who fail to reach their potential, while students with learning disability are characterized by neurological disorders which affect the brains’ abilities to receive, process, store and respond to stimuli. The following is a more comprehensive definition of learning disability suggested by Kirk and Gallagher (1979).
A specific learning disability is a psychological or neurological impediment to spoken or written language or perceptual, cognitive or motor behavior.
The impediment (1) is manifested by discrepancies among specific behaviors and achievements or between evidenced ability and academic achievement, (2) is of such nature and extent that the child does not learn by the instructional methods and materials appropriate for the majority of children and requires specialized procedures for development, and (3) is not primarily due to severe mental retardation, sensory handicap, emotional problems, or lack of opportunity to learn. (p. 285)
Students with mental retardation, visual or auditory impairment, emotional problems, or lack of opportunity are excluded from the category of learning difficulties. For students with learning disability, what they need is not to catch up developmental teaching; instead, they need special education. Students with physical
13
impairment or emotional problems could also have learning difficulties, and they need multiple assistances (Kirk & Gallagher, 1979).
On the other hand, for underachievers, teachers have to diagnose what factors cause their underachievement before providing remedial instruction. Normally, these students have both internal and external factors (Baum et al., 1991; Otto & Smith, 1980; Rimm, 1986; Whitmore, 1989). Internal factors include intelligence, emotional health, physical health, neurological function, academic skills, behavioral self-control, and affective factors. External factors contain family factors, school factors, and social factors. Thus, teachers should launch an investigation before implementing remedial instruction.
It is important to note that the definition of underachievers in Taiwan is slightly different. As long as students who fail to meet the expectations in school settings such as monthly exams or ability screening tests implemented in remedial instruction programs, they are regarded as underachievers. Thus, they do not include “bright underachievers” but may include “slow learners” that have achieved the limit of their abilities and students with learning disability. In the following section, remedial instructions provided for underachievers in Taiwan are presented.
Remedial Instruction in Taiwan
Remedial instruction, also call clinical teaching, is to provide additional and individualized assistance for students who fail to reach minimum academic requirements in schools (Tu, 1993). Circulating among the three steps
“evaluation-teaching-reevaluation” (Chang, 2000), remedial instruction requires teachers to plan specific curriculum, design a series of materials, and choose appropriate teaching methods based on students’ learning difficulties after evaluating the target students’ competences. Then the teachers evaluate students' progress again
14
after the implementation of remedial instruction. Huang (1999) presented a process of remedial instruction (Figure 1) which illustrates that students’ learning problems need to be diagnosed through teachers’ constant observations and valid diagnostic instruments. After knowing the students’ needs, the teachers can design appropriate materials and implement remedial instruction. In the end of the instruction, the students’ learning outcomes should be assessed.
Figure 1.
Procedure of Remedial Instruction
Chiu (2000) proposed another model of remedial instruction which focuses on the process after the assessments (Figure 2). Different from Huang’s model, Chiu emphasized what the teachers should do when students failed the tests after receiving remedial instruction. In Chiu’s model, students who do not pass the tests would first receive group-teaching of five to ten students before taking another assessment. If the students fail the tests again, they would receive second stage individualized instruction.
Figure 2.
Two-stage Remedial Instruction Model
15
As pointed out by Chang (2000), curriculum, teaching methods, and materials in remedial courses should be carefully designed. Chang, Ciou and Li (2000) also suggested that teachers should evaluate students’ academic abilities and find out how well individual students have learned and what they should improve in the remedial courses. Therefore, in the following parts, curriculum, teaching methods, materials, and evaluation of remedial instruction in Taiwan are reviewed.
Curriculum Design
Many kinds of remedial curriculum have been developed to increase the effects of remedial instruction in Taiwan. Among them, six remedial programs identified by Tu (1993) are widely cited and discussed in the remedial instruction literature (Chang, 2000; Chang, Ciou, & Li, 2000; Zou & Hsu, 2009).
Compensatory program. Compensatory programs share the same learning objectives with regular programs; however, students in compensatory programs are taught according to their strengths. For instance, if a student’s listening and speaking abilities are better than reading and writing abilities, the teacher will replace textbooks with audio books, written tests with oral tests, and note-taking with tape-recording.
By doing so, the student is able to absorb the knowledge faster and easier.
Tutorial program. Tutorial programs aim to provide additional assistance to students who fail to learn what teachers teach in regular programs. Students in this program can learn the contents again on one-on-one teaching or group teaching.
Though the tutorial program provides the students second chance to learn the materials, it takes teachers more time and efforts to take care of individual students, so few teachers would like to implement it. Therefore, some teachers will invite capable students as teachers’ assistances to help their peers.
Adaptive program. Adaptive programs also have similar learning objectives,
16
learning contents, and teaching methods with the regular program. However, the teachers will leave ten to fifteen minutes for one-on-on teaching after the whole class lecturing. The materials and teaching methods are normally designed and utilized by the teachers based on students’ needs and levels. To put it simply, the adaptive program is a student-centered program where the materials, the teaching methods, and the curriculum are tools for students to learn.
Supplemental program. Supplemental programs are a special program, providing important knowledge or skills not included in regular curriculum. The knowledge and skills may be essential for certain objectives. For example, in the supplementary program, students learn the English listening or writing skills in order to pass the exams or they practice the knowledge and skills again and again in order to get better scores in tests.
Basic skills program. Basic skills programs emphasize the basic skills which the students should have acquired in regular courses. For instance, if a fifth grader’s writing ability is lower than the third grade level, then he or she will receive writing remedial instruction at third grade level. The ultimate goal of the program is not for students to learn the materials, but to master the basic skills. The assumption of basic skills program is that learning is in linear order—the students have to master the basic skills in one stage in order to move on to the next stage. Thus if the students fail to acquire the basic skills at certain stage, they should receive remedial instruction in basic skills training.
Learning strategies training program. Learning strategies training programs put emphasis on learning strategies training. Learning strategies can be divided into two categories, general learning strategies and subjects-specific strategies (Zou & Hsu, 2009). The former includes cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, memory-related strategies, compensatory strategies, affective strategies, and social
17
strategies. The latter includes learning strategies needed in subject matters such as reading strategies, writing strategies, or problem-solving strategies.
Teaching Methods
Since teaching methods are one of the factors causing students’
underachievement (Zou & Hsu, 2009), most teachers tend to use different ways to present the materials in remedial courses. After reviewing several teaching methods, Chang (2000) recommends five remedial teaching methods.
Direct instruction. Instead of using discussion, seminars, workshops, case study, or internship, direct instruction uses lectures or systematical demonstrations to present the materials. Teachers who implement direct instruction help students see both the purposes and the results of each step. It is assumed that when students are explained what they are going to learn, and demonstrate the steps which they need to accomplish, they are likely to use their time more effectively and learn more.
Mastery instruction. Mastery instruction refers to a type of teaching which requires students to “master” before they move on to the next unit (Slavin, 1987).
That is, students in mastery instruction will go through a series of trials and errors and master the specified knowledge before they move on to a next unit of instruction.
Strongly influenced by behaviorism in the 1960s, Bloom (1968) believed that students’ achievements did not mainly rely on intelligence and aptitude; instead, effort and time devoted in the learning would make the outcomes different. Thus, mastery of each step prior to advancing to the next step is essential in mastery instruction.
Cooperative learning. Cooperative learning is an approach to organize classroom activities for students to work together to accomplish shared goals.
Contrasted with competitive and individualistic learning, students within cooperative situations capitalize on one another’s resources and skills (by asking one another for
18
information, evaluating one another’s ideas, monitoring one another’s work, etc.) and seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and to all other group members (M.
M. Chiu, 2000, 2008). By doing so, the students in the same group are able to develop
“positive interdependence” (Slavin, 1990) with their group members.
Individualized instruction. Opposite to mass instruction in which content, materials, and pace of learning are the same for all students in a classroom or a course, individualized instruction focuses on individual differences and paces of learning based upon the abilities and interest of each individual learner. That is, students in individualized instruction enjoy more control of their learning, and teaching materials are also designed to cater for their cognitive skills and learning styles (Gagné, Briggs,
& Wager, 1992).
Computer-assisted instruction (CAI). Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is an interactive instructional technique combining text, graphics, sound, and video to enhance the learning process. CAI in schools has become common and popular since it can be used either in isolation or in combination with conventional teaching.
Moreover, it is convenient for teachers to monitor students’ learning progress and assess the outcomes.
Teaching Materials
Many English commercial materials have been published, and most of the materials focus on certain abilities such as four skills, grammar, or vocabulary.
However, few of them are developed specifically for English remedial instruction.
Thus, some teachers use the same textbooks as these in regular classes and teach all of them in the remedial classes so that the students can review and practice the materials again. Zou and Hsu (2009) argue that teaching textbooks again can increase exposure for students who need more time to develop knowledge; however, it might not help
19
students who have difficulties in understanding and applying what they have learned from the textbooks.
To provide more choices for teachers, Zou and Hsu (2009) suggested three possible sources of materials for remedial instruction. The first one is to simplify the textbook contents instead of teaching all of them again. Chang (2000) expressed that when designing materials for middle or low-achievers, teachers can simplify materials and design interesting activities to arouse students’ motivation. Teachers can focus on some important concepts in one lesson and have students practice them until they get a better grasp of the concepts. By simplifying the textbook contents, it can ease the learning burden of the underachievers and enable them to pay full attention to the contents assigned by the teachers. In 2008, Shi (2008) carried out a study exploring the effect of English remedial instruction. Two English underachievers received twenty remedial instruction classes. The results showed that simplifying materials increased English underachievers’ learning effect, and students improved their vocabulary, sentence patterns, and speaking after the English remedial classes.
Second, some teachers design special materials for their students. Shao (1998) found that materials designed by the teachers would make a difference in English remedial instruction. The teacher-made materials provide customized explanations for some important concepts for students to review before the exams. In order to examine the effect of self-designed materials, Chen (2009) invited sixty fifth-grade math underachievers as participants. They were divided into two groups for a three-week experiment. Control group used traditional materials, while experimental group used self-designed materials. The results demonstrated that the experimental group benefited from self-designed mathematic materials and they made significant progress after three weeks of treatments.
20
The third learning material suggested by Zou and Hsu is learning package which is competence-based and self-directed learning. It enables students to acquire concepts or skills in their speed. Each set of learning packages has its own learning objectives, providing various activities to assist the students to learn a concept or a skill gradually. According to Chang (2000), learning package has three advantages for remedial instruction. First, each set of learning package is designed for a specific concept or skill with various activities, and the materials are easy to learn in order to eliminate learned helplessness. Second, teachers do not have to prepare many types of equipment to use learning package in class. What students need is a chair, a desk, and a set of learning materials. Third, learning package can facilitate individualized instruction. Teachers can guide students to finish activities, or students are able to learn the concept or skill at their own pace.
Diagnosis and Evaluation
The goal of evaluation here is not to label the students as underachievers; instead, it can help teachers to know whether the materials or teaching methods are helpful for students, and to understand what students have learned, what they have not learned yet, and what their learning weaknesses are (Gipps & Murphy, 1994). Therefore, students will know where they should work on, and teachers can design specific materials for them.
Before implementing remedial instruction, diagnostic tests provide teachers general ideas about students’ levels and weaknesses so that teachers can place them appropriately and design curriculum suitable for them. Otto and Smith (1980) suggested three levels of evaluation—survey level, specific level, and intensive level—for teachers. In survey level, teachers keep record of underachievers’ merits and weaknesses, and find out their learning problems. Then teachers can use diagnosis
21
at specific level to check out the results of survey level and to identify a student’s strength and weakness in detail to design remedial instruction. Standardized tests or
at specific level to check out the results of survey level and to identify a student’s strength and weakness in detail to design remedial instruction. Standardized tests or