Introduction to Volume 44, Issue 1 of the Learning Disability Quarterly

Abstract

Dr. Dake Zhang is the guest editor of this special series on geometry. Part 1 of the series contains 3 of the 5 articles; the other articles will appear in Part 2. I am pleased that Dr. Zhang took the lead on identifying authors and topics of papers that focus on geometry for this special issue. According to the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008), proficiency with aspects of geometry should be understood as the “Critical Foundations of Algebra” (p. 18). Moreover, emphases on the essential “concepts and skills that constitute geometry must be provided at the elementary and middle grade levels” (p. 18). Certainly, familiarity with spatial reasoning and geometric learning trajectories enhance understanding of geometry. Unfortunately, geometry is a mathematics domain that tends to be undertaught in school and receives limited focus in mathematics texts. We know that geometric and spatial skills are critical job skills for 21st-century STEAM jobs—Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts & Architecture, and Mathematics. Therefore, I welcome this special issue topic and hope that LDQ readers will find the content informative and important for their own research and work. To begin, Zhang sets the stage by providing an introduction to the special issue. Chen, Li, and Zhang provide their insights about the TIMSS data in the paper, “Students With Specific Difficulties in Geometry: Exploring the TIMSS 2011 Data With Plausible Values and Latent Profile Analysis.” Finally, Liu, Bryant, Kiru, and Nozari’s paper, “Geometry Interventions for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Research Synthesis” focuses on an interpretive review of the literature. Following the special issue papers, Bundock, Hawken, Kiuhara, O’Keefe, O’Neil, and Cummings examine how to teach rate of change and problem solving to high school students with high incidence disabilities at Tier 3. Thus, this issue provides readers with a wealth of information about geometry while also including the important paper on rate of change and problem-solving, skills that can be challenging for high school students with disabilities. In the final paper, Doabler et al. used an empirically validated Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention to investigate whether the initial mathematics skill of 880 kindergarten students at risk of MLD predicted the quantity and quality of explicit instructional interactions experienced during the intervention. I greatly appreciate the scholarly contributions of all of these researchers to the understanding of critical issues facing our field. I hope the papers in this issue of LDQ will stimulate discussion and encourage readers to further explore these important topics.