Diagramming a Logic Strategy: Effects on Difficult Problem Types and Transfer

Abstract

Twenty-five high school learning disabled subjects were randomly assigned to one of two computer-assisted instructional treatments in syllogistic reasoning—one required a deeper level of processing with a diagrammatic response, the other conventional responding. Instructional time was constant across the two groups, yet the subjects who provided diagrammatic responses required fewer trials to reach the mastery criteria. Also, diagramming produced significantly higher posttest and maintenance test scores. Overall, the instruction was effective in (a) producing better-than-chance scores, (b) improving performance on difficult problem types, and (c) teaching learning disabled students to perform complex logical-thinking tasks to a level equivalent to that of high-achieving populations. The deeper level of processing produced differences on more difficult problem types only. Transfer measures showed that students who learned the strategy also creatively modified it to work problems in less formal forms. Variables in the meaningfulness of a strategy to learning disabled students can affect learning.