technology for persons with learning disabilities || home-computing model and children with learning...

Hammill Institute on Disabilities

Home-Computing Model and Children with Learning Disabilities: A Systemic ApproachAuthor(s): Malka Margalit, Yehudit Rochberg and Michal Al-YagonSource: Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2, Technology for Persons with LearningDisabilities (Spring, 1995), pp. 68-75Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511195 .

Accessed: 13/06/2014 10:51

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Sage Publications, Inc. and Hammill Institute on Disabilities are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Learning Disability Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.54 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 10:51:15 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511195?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


HOME-COMPUTING MODEL AND CHILDREN WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES:

A SYSTEMIC APPROACH

Malka Margalit, Yehudit Rochberg, and Michal Al-Yagon

Abstract. The search for intervention programs aimed at empowering both children and their parents has included a focus on the introduction of computers to the home environment and on parental determination to extend the advantages and benefits of technology to promote their children's academic performance and emotional growth. Using a dynamic and individualistic approach based on observations and research, a home-computing model considers parents' often controversial tendencies related to their child's education. On one hand, parents would like to be more involved in their children's education, but, on the other hand, they have difficulty staying involved as a result of stress related to their child with disabilities, lowered sense of coherence and overload of caring duties. Two suggested strategies are viewed as representing a continuum of parent-child interactions: Creating a supportive climate for home computing and parental tutoring. The social-emotional perspective of children with learning disabilities is discussed as it relates to empowering both parents and children and to promoting their coping strategies by providing opportunities for enabling technology-related experiences.

Personal computers are rapidly becoming part of our everyday life, entering both work and home environments. Many parents, having become ap- preciative of computers' advantages in their work world, and at the same time acknowledging the potentially powerful benefits of technology for promoting their children's growth, consider home computing a continuation and expansion of computer use within the school environment.

Research has demonstrated that the belief in the magical power of technology for children with learing disabilities is naive (Karsh & Repp, 1992). Thus, merely providing technology has not been found to result in any significant changes in children's achievements. Examination of the impacts of technology (Karsh & Repp, 1992) accentuated the importance of two major aspects for promoting learing: (a) the value of the structured, strategic instruction that is firmly rooted in sound cognitive and curricular theory, and (b) the role of the significant involved adult (i.e., a teacher or a parent).

In line with the growing awareness that providing students with more time may enhance their learning effectiveness (Rich & Ross, 1989), research focused attention at the children's lim- ited access to technology in schools. The entrance of computers into the home environment promises not only extended time for computer- assisted learning, but affects family interrelations, including the roles of different family members and patterns of family functioning.

MALKA MARGALIT, Ph.D., is Professor, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Israel.

YEHUDIT ROCHBERG, M.A., is an Educa- tional and Rehabilitation Psychologist, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Israel.

MICHAL AL-YAGON, M.A., is a Doctoral Can- didate and Creative Art Therapist, School of Ed- ucation, Tel Aviv University, Israel.

68 Learning Disability Quarterly



Sense of Coherence Construct In an attempt to develop an effective model

for empowering parents through their involvement in and support of their children's home computing, ecological considerations, and cognitive and emotional variables have been identified and examined (Margalit, 1990a). Within this approach, which focuses on modes of effective coping with stressful conditions (i.e., having a child with learning disabilities), interventional aspects that have the potential of empowering individuals and families were studied (Dunst, Triv- ette, & Deal, 1988).

The critical issue in this model concerns the identification of factors that may act as buffers, thereby contributing to resilience and effective coping. Within this framework, a sense of coherence (Antonovsky, 1987) is proposed as a guid- ing structure. The sense of coherence construct has been defined as a global orientation which expresses the extent to which parents have a dynamic feeling of confidence that (a) their internal and external environments are structured and predictable, (b) it is highly probable that things will work out as well as can reasonably be expected, and inner and outer resources are available to meet demands, and (c) these demands can be viewed as challenges, worthy of energy investment and engagement. Antonovsky (1984, 1987) suggested that this construct includes three main interrelated components: comprehensibility, manageability and meaningfulness.

Comprehensibility refers to the extent to which environmental information is viewed as ordered, consistent, and clear, rather than ran- dom and accidental. Manageability, in turn, de- fines the extent to which parents usually feel that the resources at their disposal are adequate for coping with demands. The third component, meaningfulness, represents the emotional and motivational element of the construct. That is, parents with a strong meaningfulness level view a variety of events as challenging and worthy of energy investment and commitment. Foci of the Intervention Model

The intervention model that has been devel- oped in line with the sense of coherence construct includes three major interrelated foci:

1. The family system 2. The impacts of home computing 3. Parental strategies

In order to empower children and their par-

ents, and to promote their sense of coherence, the first focus emphasizes the importance of un- derstanding families, while the second addresses the ecological changes in the computerized environment. Finally, the strategic consequences of home computing are dealt with in the third focus.

1. Family system. Bronfenbrenner (1986) pointed out the importance of determining the bidirectional influences of individuals' and settings' characteristics. For example, disability within the family environment introduces changes into systemic interactions between several factors, including the child's increased and different needs, parents' decreased abilities to meet these needs because of their feelings of distress as a response to their child's situation, and environmental conditions.

Farber's pioneering research (1959) directed attention to the stress experienced by parents of children with severe disabilities. From this study, a whole body of research emerged with a focus on the multiple connections among environmental forces, parental characteristics, and children's disabilities and attributes and their dynamic reciprocal contribution to family interactions (Cummings & Cicchetti, 1990; Seligman & Darling, 1989).

Although every family system is unique, common patterns have been identified among families of children with disabilities (Trivette et al., 1990). In a series of studies based on the transactional-ecological model, which assumes that children influence and are influenced by their environment, parents have been seen to affect and be affected by the characteristics of their children (Amerikaner & Omizo, 1984; Bruck, 1986; Green, 1990; Margalit, Raviv, & Ankon- ina, 1992; Silver, 1989). Parents of children with learning disabilities revealed lower levels of personal coherence, increased anxiety experiences, and less satisfaction from their lives in general, than parents of nondisabled children. They also showed more attempts at structuring and controlling their family climate, and in addition, reported more conflicts in their family sys- tems, less support among family members, more communication deviances, and less encourage- ment of free emotional expression.

Among families of children with learning disabilities, parents reported fewer opportunities for intellectual or recreational leisure activities (Mar- galit & Almougy, 1991; Margalit & Heiman,

Volume 18, Spring 1995 69



1986). Based on his research, Green (1990) pointed to parental deviant communication style and underorganized family structure as characteristics of families with children who have learning disabilities. Even within an extremely supportive kibbutz community network in Israel, which is finely attuned to the individual needs of its members, similar results were reported (Margalit, Leyser, Ankonina, & Avraham, 1991). Kibbutz parents, much like city parents, felt less coherent than parents of nondisabled children, and reported that their families were less supportive and cohesive and provided their members with less opportunities for personal growth in intellectual and cultural areas than other families.

In a study of parental stress and concern (Mar- galit, 1990b), the following three areas emerged as sources of distress: children's learning and behavior problems, leisure activities, and social relations. Indeed, children with learning disabilities were found to be at risk for developing poor in- terpersonal relations (Carlson, 1987). Different sources of information, such as children's self-reports, peer evaluations, and teacher ratings con- sistently point at disabled children's lower popu- larity and greater rejection by peers, while at the same time indicating their higher dependence on other children during social interactions (Bru- ininks, 1983; Pearl, 1987).

In a recent study, Margalit (1994) conceptual- ized the experience of loneliness among children with learning disabilities as the combined out- come of three different factors: (a) the unsatis- fied need for a close and intimate friend, (b) the unfulfilled wish to belong to a highly valued group of peers and sometimes even being re- jected and neglected by them, and (c) the developmental difficulty to stay alone.

If indeed growth in the child's ability to stay alone reflects individual characteristics and developmental patterns, the child with learning disabilities disclosed more difficulties than their peers in staying active and involved in solitary activities. The children's passive life-style and prolonged dependence on adults for planning learning and leisure activities (Margalit, 1984) triggered parental feelings of helplessness, especially with regard to their perceptions of their children's social isolation. Enjoyment of computer games has, among other variables, been found to predict a reduced sense of loneliness for children with learning disabilities: For these

children, these enjoyable solitary activities have been viewed as effective coping in times of loneliness as well as a common ground for developing mutual relationships with peers (Margalit, 1994).

Clarification of parental stress as related to patterns of family climate and children's characteristics should be considered as the start point for planning empowerment intervention, promoting the comprehension component in the sense of coherence construct. The realization that the computer's impact is dependent on parental coping patterns focuses interest not only on the advantages of technology, but also on the computer environment at home.

2. Impacts of home computing. This focus attempted to clarify the implications of the entrance of the computer into the home environment, and its effects on parental expectations, decision making, and family relations. Since the computer has been considered powerful enough to influence the family ecology (Mar- galit, 1990a), related aspects need to be investi- gated, such as parents' expectations from technology and the decision-making process leading up to the purchase and placement of the computer. Further questions such as the following should be studied: What do family members do with the computer, and how do they interact in relation to computer activity? The results of such investigations would provide rich research information that is extremely valuable for planning effective interventions.

In a survey of parental expectations (Margalit, 1990b), parents were found to anticipate that using technology at school and at home could miraculously help their children in areas of major difficulty and promote their own sense of manageability as competent parents. Fathers' expectations were found to be significantly higher than those of mothers, and many fathers were eager to share their work-related technology knowledge by helping the schools in the use of computers. Survey results also demonstrated the potential of the technology to affect parent-child interactions, fostering a unique role for both parents, and especially for fathers. A strong belief in the power of technology may be a source of motivation and involvement for many parents, and enhance their sense of manageability, or it may lead to frustra- tion, anger and despair when computers fail to live up to unrealistically high expectations.




The study of the decision making related to the purchase and placement of the computer yielded a wealth of information on family dynamics, action style and coping strategies. Though many parents, for instance, reported that they planned for the computer to be used mainly as an exten- sion of school remedial activity, these same parents felt no need to actually consult the school either to ensure that the type of machine matched the one used at school, or to learn about the ap- propriate educational software.

In terms of their placement, computers were found in different locations at home, without realization of the ecological implications for the different family users. Ergonomics or human en- gineering has become an important factor in planning computer environments that promote greater work efficiency, productivity, and com- fort (Gross & Chapnik, 1987). However, research on the design of the computer workplace has primarily been conducted in work settings and not at home (Katz, 1988), and certainly has not clarified how to meet the unique needs of children with learning disabilities.

The location of the computer and the design of the workstation has a powerful, continuous impact on familial needs and interaction patterns such as the individual's needs for privacy, and the need for special supervision of young children or less distracting conditions for children with attention difficulties, as well as inter-mem- ber territorial struggles. Margalit's (1990a) study revealed that family rules were constructed- sometimes demonstrating the parents' ambiva- lent expectations. For instance, the computer use by the target child was highly valued by his parents ("the most important" activity for his development), yet he was told that "homework comes first." In another instance, the child with learning disabilities was encouraged to bring home peers to play with computer games ("after school he is so lonely"), yet the computer was placed in the parents' bedroom, where peers are not allowed to enter unsupervised. Or again, mothers stated that the most important use of the home computer was to enable game play with peers. At the same time, however, they described how uneasy they felt when their hus- bands entered home, expecting the computer to be immediately available to them.

The study of parent-child interactions in family environments with and without computers dis-

closed the combined impact of parents' and children's characteristics within different ecological conditions. Assuming that interactions with adults are an important determinant in children's cognitive and social development, changes in in- teractional patterns can be expected to have important consequences (Fraser, 1986). Research already pinpointed the "deviant" styles of parental communication among families of children with learning disabilities (Ditton, Green, & Singer, 1987; Green, 1990). The unplanned entrance of computers to these homes may accel- erate the decreased communication. On the other hand, it may lead to awareness and planned change.

Pellegrini, Brody, and Sigel (1986) examined factors that affect changes in parent-child interactions and teaching strategies. The results of their study indicated that parents varied their teaching strategies according to both task characteristics and children's communicational status. In line with Vygotsky's (1978) notion of the zone of proximal development, the parents' style re- flected both the children's competence level and task demands. Observations of parent-children interactions (Mahoney & Powel, 1988) have also pointed out that parents indeed matched their interactions and instructions with children's developmental levels. During interactions, parents be- came more active, used more prompts, commands and directions, and were less encour- aging for independent problem-solving.

The detailed investigation of parent-child interactions in different activities revealed consistent decreased verbal communication in a computer- supported activity. For example, Worden, Kee, and Ingle (1987) reported that parents' reading a book elicited overall more verbalization, while computer interactions featured more technical directions. The results of this study can be attributed not only to the different characteristics of the environments (parents are less active while playing on the computer), but also to the different characteristics of the tasks (reading a book promotes more verbalization).

In an attempt to compare interactions in environments with and without computers, we inves- tigated parent-child interactions during two similar tasks. Our observations in a pilot study (Margalit, Rochberg, & Al-Yagon, 1992), per- formed as part of the Computer-Supported So- cial Skill Training project at Tel Aviv University,




further supported earlier results. Three children (two boys and a girl) with learning disabilities and their parents participated in the study. Maya and Moshe (both 10 years old) both demonstrated externalizing behavior difficulties in addition to their learning disabilities, which were noted by their parents. The third child, Yaniv, was an 8- 1/2-year-old boy, who, in addition to learning disabilities and ADHD behaviors, also showed internalizing maladjustment as expressed in difficulty to stay involved and maintain ongoing interactions.

Interactions between parents and their children were videotaped during two types of play (10 minutes each): with computer games and with a board game. Both parents and children were asked to perform similar tasks: the child was asked to compare and match colored fig- ures, while the parents' role was to help the child perform the task, delaying impulsive behaviors. Table 1 presents the results of our observations; that is, fewer words were expressed by parents and children in the computer environment.

In the noncomputerized environment, parents and children expressed overall more words and provided more directions. In addition, the children expressed more statements that described

what they had been doing. By comparison, a decreased amount of verbalization was noticed in the computerized environment.

In addition to the ecological impact, the comparison between dyads revealed individual differences. Maya, for instance, seemed more skilled than her mother within the mother-daughter dyad in the computer environment, whereas the mother was much more dominating in the noncomputerized task. Among the parents, Moshe's father seemed the most skilled and efficient at engaging his child in the two environments, and his confidence and pleasure while using the computer were obvious. Yaniv's mother, on the other hand, had a clear difficulty in maintaining interactions with her son in both environments. Her passive approach was not effective in deal- ing with Yaniv's day dreaming.

Follow-up discussions after the parents and the experimenter had observed the videotapes together, disclosed two types of explanations:

a. Parents can be sensitized to their decreased verbal communication while using the computer. They attributed their behavior to their less skilled and spontaneous performance in the computerized environment (especially Maya's mother). They expressed a wish for short-term training to modify their communication patterns.


__



b. Parents felt the computer had its own "presence" within the parent-child interaction. It provided instruction, paced the activity and even provided reinforcement; hence the parents' active role seemed less needed. Fathers who preferred directed activities to emotional communication expressed their enjoyment and preferences for such activities

The creation of a computer environment at home has the power to induce various types of changes in family climate and interactions. As seen in our study, such changes may decrease communication or increase parental involvement. Without detailed observations and experi- mental manipulations, in an attempt to plan and control the direction of change, the impact of the computer entrance into homes of children with learning disabilities will not automatically follow the goals of interventions.

3. Parental strategies. While parents reveal a strong wish to feel coherent and effective in af- fecting the lives of their children, stress and overload of duties often impair their effectiveness. In light of the parents' desire to be involved and their simultaneous difficulty in staying involved, a model has been proposed to enhance parental coherence (Margalit, 1990a). The intervention model consisted of two types of strategies: (a) promoting a supportive home- computing climate in which the different family members are engaged in various enjoyable computer-related activites, and (b) offering structured tutoring in specific software as an answer to the children's specific needs.

In the first strategy, parents were sensitized to ecological implications of the computer environment and instructed in those aspects of the family climate that may support children's coherence through home computing, such as consistency and family rules; enabling success by providing software with a wide range of difficulty levels that are adaptable to the children's changing capacities; direct reinforcement of the activity through attention and compliments; and indirect reinforcement through shared enjoyment from different computer activities. Parents were helped to structure a family environment that was adaptable not only to the children's capacities but also to their own difficulties, therefore, increasing parental feelings of manageability and mutually meaningful enjoyment.

Tutoring, as the second strategy, was consid-

ered a more demanding, yet more rewarding parental activity. The contents of the tutoring may vary according to children's needs and parental concern. In our study, for instance, the experimentation focused on social skills training software ("I Have a Solution"). The parents learned basic problem-solving strategies, such as helping children identify social problems; search- ing for a variety of solutions while pointing out similarities and differences between them; and building on past experience. In addition, during the intervention, parents were sensitized to parent-child interaction styles, with an emphasis on contextual aspects. Parents were expected to train their child, 2-3 times a week, using a pre- defined procedure, and to monitor changes during and between sessions.

CONCLUSIONS The intervention presented here proposed dif-

ferent strategies within the sense of coherence construct, designed to empower parents by sen- sitizing them to their needs, powers and family resources; to encourage parents to participate in decision making about their preferred strategy at any specific time; and to enable parents to experience success and mastery in helping their children improve their learning and use computers in their homes.

This model may be considered individualistic in the sense that it was attuned to the children's specific needs and the parents' concerns and available personal resources. It was flexible in terms of periodic parental transitions. That is, parents were seen as moving from times of stress and overload, either at home or at work-when all they could do was to be alert to providing a supportive environment-to periods when they wanted and felt able to devote time and energy to meeting more of their children's needs through tutoring. In the latter periods, parents were moti- vated to take a more active role in changing their children's situation by assessing their family's overload-underload balance and by making deci- sions related to the type of intervention desired.

This intervention model is still at the research and development a stage. The major method- ological issue involves determining what is the target of change: the parents' sense of coherence, the learning disabled child's functioning, or the global measure of family climate? These different goals should be clearly identified at the be-




ginning of intervention, and realistically intro- duced. In addition, the sense of coherence is considered a relatively stable personality measure, only affected by a significant change in the quality of the person's life, such as the diagnosis of disability or chronic illness in the family. It would, therefore, be meaningless and even pre- tentious to expect significant changes following a short intervention period. However, a long-term intervention planning consisting of a series of short-term objectives may provide significant help to children and a sense of empowerment to their parents.

In our research, parental reports, obtained during either meetings at the university or tele- phone interviews, expressed increased satisfaction from themselves, from the intervention, and from the change in their family climate. The individual differences between parents further em- phasized the need at the present stage for a case-study approach in this intervention research. The heterogeneity of the children's difficulties, their age range, and their home-computing abilities also created difficulties in any attempt to assess comparisons and averages.

The home-computing intervention exemplifies an approach to empowering parents and their children with learning disabilities. However, computer technology cannot be expected to at- tract all families with a child with learning disabilities. Additional interventional strategies are nec- essary in order to find other content areas that would empower parents and children. A major consideration in such explorative research should be to promote children's resilience and parental coherence.

REFERENCES Amerikaner, M. J., & Omizo, M. M. (1984). Family

interaction and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 540-543.

Antonovsky, A. (1984). The sense of coherence as a determinant of health. Advances, Institute for the Advances of Health, 1(3), 37-50.

Antonovsky, A. (1987). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspec- tives. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723-742.

Bruck, M. (1986). Social and emotional adjustments of learning disabled children: A review of issues. In S. J. Ceci (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive, social, and neu- ropsychological aspects of learning disabilities (Vol. 1, pp. 361-380). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bruininks, V. L. (1983). Sociometric status, behavior ratings and social knowledge of learning disabled and low-achieving students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 329-339.

Carlson, C. I. (1987). Social interaction goals and strategies of children with learning disabilities. Jour- nal of Learning Disabilities, 20(5), 306-311.

Cummings, E. M., & Cicchetti, D. (1990). Toward a transactional model of relations between attachment and depression. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in preschool years (pp. 339-372). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ditton, P., Green, R. J., & Singer, M. T. (1987). Communication deviances: A comparison between parents of learning disabled and normally achieving students. Family Process, 26, 75-87.

Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Deal, A. G. (1988). Enabling and empowering families. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.

Farber, B. (1959). Effects of a severely mentally re- tarded child on family integration. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 24.

Fraser, B. C. (1986). Child impairment and parent/in- fant communication. Child: Care, Health and Development, 12, 141-150.

Green, R. J. (1990). Family communication and children's learning disabilities: Evidence for Coles's theory of interactivity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 145-148.

Gross, C. M., & Chapnik, E. B. (1987). Ergonomic training for tomorrow's office. Training and Devel- opment Journal, 41, 56-61.

Karsh, K. G., & Repp, A. C. (1992). Computer-assisted instruction: Potential and reality. In N. N. Singh & I. L. Beale (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Na- ture, theory and treatment (pp. 452-477). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Katz, E. H. (1988, April). Personal computers: Where to put them so that children will use them. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Convention, New Orleans, LA.

Mahoney, G., & Powel, A. (1988). Modifying parent- child interaction: Enhancing the development of handicapped children. Journal of Special Educa- tion, 22, 82-96.

Margalit, M. (1984). Leisure activities of learning disabled children as a reflection of their passive life style and prolonged dependency. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 15, 133-141.

Margalit, M. (1990a). Effective technology integration for disabled children: The family perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Margalit, M. (1990b, April). Parental roles in the home-computing of disabled students. Paper presented at the CEC convention, Toronto, Canada.

Margalit, M. (1994). Loneliness of children with special needs: Theory, research, coping and intervention. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Margalit, M., & Almougy, K. (1991). Classroom behavior and family climate in students with learning




disabilities and hyperactive behavior. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24(7), 406-412.

Margalit, M., & Heiman, T. (1986). Learning disabled boys' anxiety, parental anxiety, and family climate. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 15, 248-253.

Margalit, M., Leyser, Y., Ankonina, D. B., & Avra- ham, Y. (1991). Community support in Israeli kibbutz and city families of children with disabilities: Family climate and parental coherence. Journal of Special Education, 24(4), 427-440.

Margalit, M., Raviv, A., & Ankonina, D. B. (1992). Coping and coherence among parents with disabled children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 202-209.

Margalit, M., Rochberg, Y., & Al-Yagon, M. (1992). Parent-child dyads' interactions in two environments. Unpublished manuscript.

Pearl, R. (1987). Social cognitive factors in learning disabled children's social problems. In S. J. Ceci (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive social and neuropsy- chological aspects of learning disabilities (Vol. 2, pp. 273-294). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pellegrini, A. D., Brody, G. H., & Sigel, I. G. (1986). The effects of children's communication status and task on parents' teaching strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 1-10.

Rich, H. L., & Ross, S. M. (1989). Students' time on learning tasks in special education. Exceptional Children, 55, 508-515.

Seligman, M., & Darling, R. B. (1989). Ordinary families, special children. New York: Guilford Press.

Silver, L. B. (1989). Psychological and family problems associated with learning disabilities: Assess- ment and intervention. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28(3), 319-325.

Trivette, C. M., Dunst, C. J., Deal, A. G., Hamer, A. W., & Propst, S. (1990). Assessing family strengths and family functioning style. Topics in Early Child- hood Special Education, 10, 16-35.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cam- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Worden, P. E., Kee, D. W., & Ingle, M. J. (1987). Parental teaching strategies with preschoolers: A comparison of mothers and fathers within different alphabet tasks. Contemporary Educational Psychol- ogy, 12, 95-109.

Requests for reprints should be addressed to: Malka Margalit, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Tel Aviv, Israel.




technology for persons with learning disabilities || home-computing model and children with learning...

Documents