The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Efficacy of the Pause Procedure for Enhancing Learning Disabled and Nondisabled College Students' Long- and Short-Term Recall of Facts Presented through Lecture
Abstract
Despite growing numbers of learning disabled students in college classes, few empirically validated strategies for use by faculty when lecturing these students have appeared in the professional literature. The effect of a pausing procedure (three 2-minute pauses spaced at logical breaks during videotaped lectures) on students' performance of three dependent variables (immediate free recall of facts, long-term free recall of facts, and performance on objective tests) was determined using analysis of variance with repeated measures and follow-up t -tests. Performances of two mixed groups of learning disabled (LD) ( n = 15) and nondisabled (ND) ( n = 15) students were compared after lectures both without pauses and with pauses. Findings indicate the pause procedure is effective for enhancing student performance on immediate free-recall and objective test measures. The procedure may also be applicable to a variety of lecture situations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A classroom intervention in which the lecturer paused at suitable moments to let the students complete their notes resulted in better short-term, but not long-term recall of the contents (Ruhl et al., 1990).”
From A rapid review of supports for neurodivergent students in higher education. Implications for research and practice (2024) · cites this paper as Ruhl et al., 1990
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- Adelman H. S., Taylor L. (1986). An introduction to learning disabilities. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
- Clyde-Snyder M. (1982). Criterion and behavioral checklist for adults with specific learning disabilities. Ellensburg: Central Washington University, The Helds Project Series, Appendix A, 25–27.
- 10.1007/BF02310555 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/105345128502000309 · DOI
- Deshler D. D., Schumaker J. B., Alley G. R., Warner M. W., Clark F. L. (1980). An epidemiological study of LD adolescents in secondary schools: Academic self-image and attributions (Research Report No. 14). Lawrence: University of Kansas, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
- 10.1037/h0034589 · DOI
- 10.1016/0361-476X(79)90048-1 · DOI
- Gajar A. H. (1986). Programming for the learning disabled: A program development and service delivery guide for university service providers, diagnosticians, tutors, counselors and learning disabled students. Columbus, OH: AHSSPPE.
- Gajar A. H., Murphy J. P., Hunt F. M. (1982). A university program for learning disabled students. Reading Improvement, 19 (4).
- HEATH Resource Center. (1987). Learning disabled adults in postsecondary education (Contract No. 400–77–0857). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
- Hoy D., Gregg N. (1986). Learning disabled students: An emerging population on college campuses. The Journal of College Admissions, 112, 10–14.
- 10.1177/105345128702200510 · DOI
- Jarrow J. E. (1987). Integration of individuals with disabilities in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 5 (2), 38–57.
- Kahn M. S. (1980). Learning problems of the secondary and junior college learning disabled student: Suggested remedies. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13 (4), 40–44.
- Matthews P. R., Anderson D. W., Skolnick B. D. (1987). Faculty attitude toward accommodations for college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Focus, 3, 46–52.
- 10.1080/0748763860020404 · DOI
- Putnam M. L. (1984). Postsecondary education for learning disabled students: A review of the literature. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 (1), 68–75.
- Rowe M. B. (1976). The pausing principle — Two invitations to inquiry. Research on College Science Teaching, 5, 258–259.
- 10.1002/cc.36819803106 · DOI
- 10.1021/ed060p954 · DOI
- 10.1177/088840648701000103 · DOI
- Skrtic T. M., Deshler D. D. (1981). Instructional accessibility for post-secondary learning disabled adults. Lawrence: University of Kansas, Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
- 10.1177/088840648600900205 · DOI
- Ugland R., Duane G. (1976). Serving students with special learning disabilities in higher education — A demonstration project at three Minnesota community colleges. Bloomington, MN: Normandale Community College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 135 434).
- 10.1037/h0021797 · DOI
Cited by
Ruhl, K. L., & Suritsky, S. (1995) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.2307/1511361 · Cited by 61
Self-citationMcDowall, A., & Kiseleva, M. (2024) · Neurodiversity · doi:10.1177/27546330241291769 · Cited by 43
“A classroom intervention in which the lecturer paused at suitable moments to let the students complete their notes resulted in better short-term, but not long-term recall of the contents (Ruhl et al., 1990).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Ruhl, K. L., Hughes, C. A., & Gajar, A. H.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Venue
- Learning Disability Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1990-02
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-64
- ISSN
- 0731-9487 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-376X
- OpenAlex
- W2110426755
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 8.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Learning Disability Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Disability Education and Employment
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Educational Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Keywords
- learning disabilities, lecture method, university students, free recall, long-term retention, short-term recall, objective tests
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
