Elements of Mathematics Intervention Instrument Based on Learning Styles for Students with Learning Disabilities (IMGaP) using Fuzzy Delphi Analysis
Elemen Instrumen Intervensi Matematik Berasaskan Gaya Pembelajaran Murid Masalah Pembelajaran (IMGaP) Menggunakan Analisis Fuzzy Delphi
There is a need for a collective consideration among experts in special education to reach a mutual agreement when constructing an instrument to find a solution as expected. This study collected the perspectives of 10 special education experts to determine the elements for the Learning Styles-Based Mathematics Intervention Instrument for Students with Learning Disabilities (IMGaP) using the Fuzzy Delphi Analysis. The first round of FDM involved interviews with six experts to obtain extensive data based on the themes and sub-themes identified. The instrument determination table was constructed as a guideline to develop the IMGaP Fuzzy Delphi survey form. In the second round of the Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) study, the themes and sub-themes identified were used to develop the items in the IMGaP instrument survey. The IMGaP instrument was designed as a questionnaire with a 7-point Likert scale. There are 79 items from four dimensions. The findings showed all expert panels reached >75%, agreement and consensus, the threshold value of d≤0.2, and defuzzification (Amax) of >0.5, as prescribed. In this regard, the Fuzzy Delphi Method successfully interpreted the decisions made by expert panels based on priorities as guidelines and best practices. It has proved that the IMGaP implementation mechanism could determine the importance of considering learning styles as an important factor when conducting mathematics interventions for students with learning disabilities.
Adler, M. & Ziglio, E. (1996). Gazing into the oracle : The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Aunola, K., Leskinen, E., Lerkkanen, M.K., & Nurmi, J.E. (2004). Developmental dynamics of math performance from Preschool to Grade 2. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 699–713.
Babbie, E. (2011). The basics of social research (5th 3ed). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Bahurudin S. (2019). Meningkatkan kemahiran penambahan dan penolakan pecahan pelajar Tahun 4 melalui Fraction Cipher. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 9, 26–35.
Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D.S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73.
Barbe, W.B., Swassing, R.H., & Milone Jr, M.N. (1979). Teaching through modality strength concepts and practices. Zaner-Bloser, Inc.
Bradley, K., Peabody, M., Akers, K., & Knutson, N. (2015). Rating scales in survey research: Using the Rasch Model to illustrate the middle category measurement flaw. Survey Practice, 8(1), 1–12.
Bull, R., Espy, K.A., & Wiebe, S.A. (2008). Short-term memory, working memory, and executive functioning in preschoolers: Longitudinal predictors of mathematical achievement at age 7 years. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 205–228.
Burns, M. & Ysseldyke, J. (2008). Reported prevalence of evidence-based instructional practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 43, 3–11.
Chang, P.L., Hsu, C.W., & Chang, P.C. (2011). Fuzzy Delphi method for evaluating hydrogen production technologies. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 36(21), 14172–14179.
Clayton, M. (2006). Delphi: A technique to harness expert opinion for critical decision-making tasks in education. Educational Psychology, 17(4), 373–386.
Durand, M., Hulme, C., Larkin, R., & Snowling, M. (2005). The cognitive foundations of reading and arithmetic skills in 7- to 10-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91(2), 113–136.
Embretson, S.E. & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. L. Erlbaum Associates.
Filderman, M. & Toste, J. (2017). Decisions, decisions, decisions: Using data to make instructional decisions for struggling readers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50(3), 130–140.
Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 14–20.
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P.W. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (10th ed). Pearson Education.
Hsu, C.C. & Sandford, B. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8.
Jamil, M.R.M. & Nurulrabihah Mat Noh. (2020). Kepelbagaian metodologi dalam penyelidikan: Reka bentuk dan pembangunan. Qaisar Prestige Resources.
Jones, H., & Twiss, B.C. (1978). Forecasting technology for planning decisions. Macmillan Press.
Jordan, N.C., Kaplan, D., Locuniak, M.N., & Ramineni, C. (2007). Predicting First-Grade math achievement from developmental number sense trajectories. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(1), 36–46.
Jordan, N.C., Kaplan, D., Olah, L.N., & Locuniak, M.N. (2006). Number sense growth in kindergarten: A longitudinal investigation of children at-risk for mathematics difficulities. Child Development, 77(1), 153–177.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (2015). Buku panduan pengoperasian program Pendidikan Khas Integrasi, Bahagian Pendidikan Khas, KPM.
Khalil, S.S., Silverman, H.J., Raafat, M., El-Kamary, S., & El-Setouhy, M. (2007). Attitudes, understanding, and concerns regarding medical research amongst Egyptians: A qualitative pilot study. BMC Medical Ethics, 8(9), 1–12.
Ku, P.L., & Lim, S.C.J. (2018). Perlaksanaan dan keberkesanan kaedah Lattice dalam pengajaran kemahiran matematik: Satu kajian kes di sekolah rendah. Online Journal for TVET Practitioners, 1, 1–13.
Kumarasamy, M. (2019). Use of Buck Method Mathematics Problem Solving. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 4(31), 56–66.
Locuniak, M.N., & Jordan, N.C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(5), 451–459.
Malkowicz, D., Myers, G., & Leisman, G. (2006). Rehabilitaion of cortical visual impairment in children. The International Journal of Neuroscience, 116, 1015–1033.
Masten, A.S. (2003). Commentary: developmental psychopathology as a unifying context for mental health and education models, research, and practice in schools. School Psychology Review, 32(2), 169–173.
Nabulsi, M., Khalil, Y., & Makhoul, J. (2011). Parental attitudes towards and perceptions of their children’s participation in clinical research:A developing-country perspective. Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(7), 420–423.
Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42(1), 15–29.
Passolunghi, M.C., Vercelloni, B., & Schadee, H. (2007). The precursors of mathematics learning: Working memory, phonological ability and numerical competence. Cognitive Development, 22(2), 165–184.
Piaget, J. (1936). The origins of intelligence in children. (Original. 1936; translated by Margaret Cook and first published in U.S. in 1952). International Universities Paperback.
Pin, W.K., & Hashim, S.M. (2018). Penggunaan Kaedah Box Out untuk meningkatkan kemahiran menyelesaikan masalah matematik bercerita melibatkan operasi pendaraban. Jurnal Pendidikan, 14, 28–45.
Ridzwan, S.F.M., & Mansor, M. (2014). Roda C.I.U: Satu teknik untuk membina kemahiran mengecam dan mengingat simbol nombor bulat 1 hingga 9 bagi murid lembam. Asian Education Action Research Journal, 3, 1–25.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E.R. (2005). Research methods for social work. In Research Methods for Social Workers. Thomson/Brooks/Cole.
Seibert, P., Stridh, P., & Zimmerman, C. (2002). A checklist to facilitate cultural awareness and sensitivity. Journal of Medical Ethics, 28, 143–146.
Skinner, D., Nelson, R., Chin, W., & Land, L. (2015). The Delphi method research strategy in studies of information systems. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, 31–63.
Smedt, B.De, Verschaffel, L., & Ghesquière, P. (2009). The predictive value of numerical magnitude comparison for individual differences in mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103(4), 469–479.
Unluol U.N. (2019). What do we know about evidence-based practices?. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 7(5), 238–247.
Vaughn, S., Zumeta, R., Wanzek, J., Cook, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2014). Intensive interventions for students with learning disabilities in the RTI era: Position statement of the division for learning disabilities council for exceptional children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 29(3), 90–92.
Woodward, J., Baxter, J., & Robinson, R. (1999). Rules and reasons: Decimal instruction for academically low achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(1), 15–24.
Xin, Y.P., & Jitendra, A.K. (1999). The effects of instruction in solving mathematical word problems for students with learning problems: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 207–225.
Yasin, A. A., Mustapha, R., Sahandri, M., & Hamzah, G. (2015). Keberkesanan Magic Maths terhadap penguasaan sifir dalam kalangan pelajar Tahun 2. Asian Education Action Research Journal, 4, 1–21.
Yousuf, M. (2007). Using experts’ opinions through Delphi Technique. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(4), 1–8.
Copyright (c) 2022 Nafisah binti Baharom, Norshidah binti Mohamad Salleh, Mohd Mokhtar bin Tahar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.