Research

Know the facts

UDL Guidelines - Version 2.0: Research Evidence

Checkpoint 3.4: Maximize transfer and generalization

I. Provide Multiple Means of Representation

Comprehension

Summary

Learning can be cognitively inaccessible when success requires specific capacities in working or long-term memory, and where there are no options for students who differ in such memory capacities. Some students require explicit supports for memory and transfer in order to improve cognitive accessibility. Supports for memory and transfer include techniques that are designed to heighten the memorability of information as well as those that prompt and guide students to employ explicit mnemonic strategies. The experimental and quantitative research listed below supports the effectiveness of strategies such as strategic note-taking, visual imagery, and explicitly teaching for transfer in order to support students’ memory and transfer. The scholarly reviews and expert options provide a more classroom based perspective on strategies that will support memory and transfer.

udlcenter [at] cast [dot] org (Do you have )udlcenter [at] cast [dot] org (additional )udlcenter [at] cast [dot] org (evidence to support this Checkpoint? Tell us! )

Experimental and Quantitative Evidence:

Boyle, J. R., & Weishaar, M. (2001). The effects of strategic notetaking on the recall and comprehension of lecture information for high school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(3), 133-141.

Breznitz, Z. (1997). Effects of accelerated reading rate on memory for text among dyslexic readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 289-297.

Brownell, M. T., Mellard, D. F., & Deshler, D. D. (1993). Differences in the learning and transfer performance between students with learning disabilities and other low-achieving students on problem-solving tasks. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 138-156.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Finelli, R., Courey, S. J., & Hamlett, C. L. (2004). Expanding schema-based transfer instruction to help third graders solve real-life mathematical problems. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 419-445.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Appleton, A. C. (2002). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem-solving performance of students with mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 90-106.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Phillips, N. B., Hamlett, C. L., & Karns, K. (1995). Acquisition and transfer effects of classwide peer-assisted learning strategies in mathematics for students with varying learning histories. School Psychology Review, 24(4), 604-620.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K., Burch, M., Hamlett, C. L., Owen, R., et al. (2003). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on third-grade students’ mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 293-305.

Ganske, L. (1981). Note-taking: A significant and integral part of learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 29(3), 155-175.

Garcia-Mila, M. (2007). Developmental change in notetaking during scientific inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 1035-1058.

Hayes, D. S., Kelley, S. B., & Mandel, M. (1986). Media differences in children's story synopses: Radio and television contrasted. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(5), 341-346.

Jacobson, M. J. (2008). A design framework for educational hypermedia systems: Theory, research, and learning emerging scientific perspectives. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 5-28.

Pezdek, K. (1987). Memory for pictures: A life-span study of the role of visual detail. Child Development, 58(3), 807-815.

Robinson, D. H., Robinson, S. L., & Katayama, A. D. (1999). When words are represented in memory like pictures: Evidence for spatial encoding of study materials. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(1), 38-54.

Serafino, K., & Cicchelli, T. (2003). Cognitive theories, prior knowledge, and anchored instruction on mathematical problem solving and transfer. Education and Urban Society, 36(1), 79-93.

Stern, E., Aprea, C., & Ebner, H. G. (2003). Improving cross-content transfer in text processing by means of active graphical representation. Learning & Instruction, 13(3), 191-203.

Van Eck, R., & Dempsey, J. (2002). The effect of competition and contextualized advisement on the transfer of mathematics skills a computer-based instructional simulation game. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 23-41.

Scholarly reviews and expert opinions:

Butterfield, E. C., & Nelson, G. D. (1989). Theory and practice of teaching for transfer. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(3), 5-38.

Edyburn, D. (2006). Cognitive prostheses for students with mild disabilities: Is this what assistive technology looks like. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(4), 62-65.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Prentice, K., Burch, M., & Paulsen, K. (2002). Hot math: Promoting mathematical problem solving among third-grade students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(1), 70-73.

Hughes, C. A., & Suritsky, S. K. (1993). Notetaking skills and strategies for students with learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 38(1), 7-11.

Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McKeough, A. (1995). Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalizations in learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pea, R. D. (1988). Putting knowledge to use. In R. S. Nickerson & P. R. Zodhiates (Eds.), Technology in education: Looking toward 2020 (pp. 167-212). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1998). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 22-32.

Pressley, M., Johnson, C. J., Symons, S., McGoldrick, J. A., & Kurita, J. A. (1989). Strategies that improve children's memory and comprehension of text. The Elementary School Journal, 90(1), 3-32.

Ritchie, D., & Karge, B. D. (1996). Making information memorable: Enhanced knowledge retention and recall through the elaboration process. Preventing School Failure, 41(1), 28-33.

Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanism of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 113-142.

Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D. D., Zemitzsch, A., & Warner, M. W. (1993). The visual imagery strategy. Lawrence, KS: The University of Kansas.

Seidel, R. J., Perencevich, K. C., & Kett, A. L. (2005). From principles of learning to strategies for instruction: Empirically based ingredients to guide instructional development. New York, NY: Springer.

Singer, H., & Donlan, D. (1982). Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(2), 166-186.

Last Updated: 02/01/2011

Select this then click anywhere on the page to start reading text Play Pause Stop