Anchored Instruction: Enhancements Literature Review: Curriculum: Research & Solutions: NCAC: CAST

Anchored instruction is an approach for instruction and exploration that occurs in a shared environment. All activities in an anchored learning environment are designed around a realistic situation-or anchor-in which there is a problem to be solved by the group. For example, students could study the effects of different weather conditions on plants by growing plants under a variety of conditions, charting and tracking the weather, simulating the weather conditions, and observing how the plants respond.

Curriculum materials used in anchored instruction are often, but not always, technology-based. All the data needed to solve the problem are embedded in the situation. Students work in small groups to investigate aspects of the situation in order to gather relevant information to solve the problem.

This method of exploration encourages students to view knowledge as tools that can be applied to new situations rather than knowledge as facts to be learned.

Evidence of effectiveness

While only a limited number of research studies have been published on anchored instruction (we identified eleven), those studies generally found that the use of anchored instruction in general education and special education classroom settings had a positive effect on student achievement.

Anchored instruction was found to be helpful when used with a variety of populations. Populations studied included students with learning disabilities, students with orthopedic disabilities, students who are mentally retarded, students with emotional disabilities, students with behavioral difficulties, and students described as "low achieving" and "at risk." All of these groups of students were found to benefit academically from the use of anchored instruction in one or more studies. Three of four studies that examined the effect of the use of anchored instruction on student affect and/or motivation with students from these groups found that the use of anchored instruction was associated with increased student motivation.

While some classrooms of typically achieving students were studied and found to benefit academically as well, no "high achieving" or advanced students' use of anchored instruction was examined in the literature we reviewed.

The studies we reviewed examined students at the elementary (primarily upper elementary) and middle school levels. No studies were conducted with high school students.

About half the uses of anchored instruction studied included the use of technology (for instance, video disks or video tapes).

Some of the studies included in this review have significant methodological drawbacks, such as small sample sizes and lack of a control group, which makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the effect of the use of anchored instruction in classrooms. In addition, no study examined whether anchored instruction results in long term transfer of skills, and the small number of studies conducted overall makes any conclusions about the usefulness of anchored instruction preliminary.

Still, while this research evidence is not conclusive, it suggests that anchored instruction may be a helpful tool with many student populations, especially with groups of younger students across school content areas who may have difficulty with a typical abstract curriculum.

Anchored Instruction Data Tables

Anchored Instruction References

Bottge, B. A. (1999). Effects of contextualized math instruction on problem solving of average and below-average achieving students. The Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 81-92.

Bottge, B. A., & Hasselbring, T. S. (1993). A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, 59(6), 556-566.

Glaser, C. W., Rieth, H. J., Kinzer, C. K., Colburn, L. K., & Peter, J. (2000). A description of the impact of multimedia anchored instruction on classroom interactions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14(2), 27-43.

Goldman, S. R., Petrosino, A. J., Sherwood, R. D., Garrison, S., Hickey, D., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1996). Anchoring science instruction in multimedia learning environments. In S. Vosniadou, E. De Corte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the psychological foundations of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 257-284). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Griffin, M. M. (1995). You can't get there from here: Situated learning, transfer, and map skills. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20(1), 65-87.

Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of concept- oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. The Elementary School Journal, 99(4), 343-366.

Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., Hancock, G. R., Alao, S., Anderson, E., & McCann, A. (1998). Does concept-oriented reading instruction increase strategy use and conceptual learning from text? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 261-278.

Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Poundstone, C., Rice, M. E., Fabisch, F., Hunt, B., & Mitchell, A. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 306-332.

Mokros, J. R., & Tinker, R. F. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 369-383.

Sharp, D. L. M., Bransford, J. D., Goldman, S. R., Risko, V. J., Kinzer, C. K., & Vye, N. J. (1995). Dynamic visual support for story comprehension and mental model building by young, at-risk children. Educational Technology Research & Development, 43(4), 25-42.

Sherwood, R. D., Kinzer, C. K., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1987). Some benefits of creating macro-contexts for science instruction: Initial findings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(5), 417-435.

This Web Site was developed pursuant to cooperative agreement #H324H990004 under CFDA 84.324H between CAST and the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education. However, the opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S. Department of Education or the Office of Special Education Programs and no endorsement by that office should be inferred.