iCAN References

  1. AccessSTEM (2008). The Alliance for Access to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from
  2. Adams, L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on Direct Instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.
  3. Alston, R. J., Bell, T. J., & Hampton, J. L. (2002). Learning disability and career entry into the sciences: A critical factor analysis of attitudinal Journal of Career Development, 28, 263– 275.
  4. Aud, S., Hussar, W., Johnson, F., Kena, G., Roth, E., Manning, E., Wang, X., and Zhang, J. (2012). The Condition of Education 2012 (NCES 2012-045). S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved 04/23/2013 from
  5. Aydeniz, , Cihak, D. F., Graham, S. C., & Retinger, L. (2012). Using inquiry-based instruction to teach science to students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 27(2), 1-18.
  1. Bandura, (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
  2. Barkley, A. (2012). Executive functions: what they are, how they work, and why they evolved. New York: Guilford Press.
  1. Basham, D. & Marino, M. T. (2013). Understanding STEM education and supporting students through Universal Design for Learning. Teaching Exceptional Children. 45(4), 8-15.
  2. Beasley, M. A., & Fischer, M. J. (2012). Why they leave: the impact of stereotype threat on the attrition of women and minorities from science, math and engineering Social Psychology of Education, 15(4), 427-448.
  3. Brookes, D.T., & Etkina, E. (2007). Using conceptual metaphor and functional grammar to explore how language used in physics affects student Physical Review Special Topics— Physics Education Research, 3(1), DOI 010105-1-010105-16.
  4. Brown, S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
  5. Burgstahler, , & Bellman, S. (2009). Perceived benefits of internships for subgroups of students with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 31(3), 155-165.
  6. Burgstahler, S., & Chang, C. (2009). Promising interventions for promoting STEM fields to students who have Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 5(2), 29- 47.
  7. Burgstahler, S., Moore, & Crawford, L. (2011). Report of the AccessSTEM/AccessComputing/DO-IT Longitudinal Tracking Study (ALTS), Seattle: DO-IT, University of
  8. Burrelli, J. S., & Falkenheim, J. C. (2011). Diversity in the federal science and engineering workforce. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation, Directorate for the Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (NSF 11-303).
  9. CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 0. Wakefield, MA: Author.
  10. Chen, (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.
  11. Cheville, (2010). Transformative experiences: Scaffolding design learning through the Vygotsky cycle. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26(4), 760-770.
  12. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
  13. Committee on Research Universities Board on Higher Education and Workforce Policy and Global Affairs (2012). Research Universities and the Future of America: Ten Breakthrough Actions Vital to Our Nation’s Prosperity and Washington: National Academies Press.
  1. Cooper, M., Cox, C. T., Jr., Nammouz, M., Case, E., and Stevens, R. J. (2008). An assessment of the effect of collaborative groups on students’ problem-solving strategies and abilities. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(6), 866-872.
  2. Couros, 2009. Open, connected, social: Implications for educational design. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(3): 232–239.
  3. Davis, B., & Higdon, K. (2008). The effects of mentoring/induction support on beginning teachers’ practices in early elementary classrooms (K-3). Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(3), 261-274.
  4. Denckla, M. (2007). Executive Function: Binding Together the Definitions of Attention- Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Learning In L. Meltzer (Ed.) , Executive function in education: From theory to practice (pp. 5-18). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
  5. Dieker, , Hughes, C., Hynes, M., & Straub, C. (2013). TeachLivETM National Research Project –Year 1 Results: Report to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida.
  6. Dunaway, K. 2011. Connectivism: Learning theory and pedagogical practice for networked information landscapes. DOI 10.1108/00907321111186686.
  7. Dunleavy, , Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22.
  8. Dunn, C., Rabren, K. S., Taylor, S. L., & Dotson, C. K. (2012). Assisting Students With High- Incidence Disabilities to Pursue Careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(1), 47-54.
  9. Edelson, C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. C. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 391–350.
  10. Elliot, B., Rubin, B., DeCaro, J. J., Clymer, E. W., Earp, K., & Fish, M. D. (2013). Creating a virtual academic community for STEM students. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 5(2). 173-188.
  11. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160.
  12. Fortus, , Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design- based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1081–1110.
  13. Fuchs, , Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Martinez, E. (2002). Preliminary evidence on the social standing of students with learning disabilities in PALS and No-PALS classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17(4), 205-215.
  14. Glaser, , & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
  15. Goldstein, , Naglieri, J. A., Princiotta, D., & Otero, T. M. (2014). Introduction: A History of Executive Functioning as a Theoretical and Clinical Construct. Handbook Of Executive Functioning, 3. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4614-8106-5_1
  16. Graham, J., Frederick, J., A. Byars-Winston, Hunter, A. & Handelsman, J. (2013). Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science, 341, 1455-1456.
  17. Graves, L., Asunda, P. A., Plant, S. J., & Goad, C. (2011). Asynchronous Online Access as an Accommodation on Students with Learning Disabilities and/or Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders in Postsecondary STEM Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(4), 317-330.
  18. Gregg, N., Chang, Y., & Todd, R. (2012). Social Media, Avatars, and Virtual Worlds: Re- imagine an Inclusive Learning Environment for Adolescents and Adults with Literacy Procedia Computer Science, 14, 336-342.
  1. D.C., Hillerislambers, J., Pitre, E., Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332, 1213-1230.
  2. Hennessy, S., Wishart, J., Whitelock, D., Deaney, R., Brawn, R., la Velle, L., et al. (2007). Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science Computers & Education, 48, 137–152.
  3. Hunter, A., Laursen, S. L., & Seymour, E. (2006). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional Science Education, 91, 36-74.
  4. Israel, M. Marino, M. T., & Basham, J. D. (2014, April). Teaching science with video games: Implications for engaging students with Council for Exceptional Children Annual Convention, Philadelphia, PA.
  5. Israel, M., Wang, S., Marino, M. T., & Basham, J. D. (2014, April). A multilevel analysis of diverse learners playing science video games: Interactions between gaming features, learning disability status, reading proficiency, and gender. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association 14th Annual Philadelphia, PA.
  6. Isquith, , Roth, R., and Gioia, G. (2010). Tasks of Executive Control (TEC). Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc: Odessa, FL.
  7. Izzo, V., Murray, A., Priest, S., & McArrell, B. (2011). Using student learning communities to recruit STEM students with disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(4), 301-316.
  8. Johns, , Jonsson, A., Mehranian, H., Arroyo, I., Woolf, B. P., Barto, A., Fisher, D., Mahadevan.
  9. (2005). Evaluating the Feasibility of Learning Student Models from Data, 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-05), 12, p.35.
  10. Johnson, C. (2012). Implementation of STEM education policy: Challenges, progress and lessons learned. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 45-55.
  11. Leddy, H. (2010). Technology to advance high school and undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(3), 3-8.
  12. Light, & Micari, M. (2013). Making scientists: Six principles for effective college teaching. Harvard University Press.
  13. Liu, , J. Sharkness, and J. H. Pryor. (2008). Findings from the 2007 Administration of Your First College Year (YFCY): National Aggregates. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, University of California–Los Angeles.
  14. Lopatto, , et al. (2008). Genomics Education Partnership. Science, 322, 684-685.
  15. Madaus, W., Gelbar, N. W., Dukes, L. L., Faggella-Luby, M. N., Lalor, A. R., & Kowitt, J. (2013). Thirty-five years of transition: A review of CDTEI Issues from 1978-2012. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 7-14.
  16. Marino, T. (2010). Defining a technology research agenda for elementary and secondary students with learning and other high incidence disabilities in inclusive science classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology 25(1), 1-28.
  17. Marino T. (2012, November). Increasing middle school students STEM performance using video games. Featured Speaker at the University of Central Florida Research and Commercialization Outreach Services annual meeting. Orlando, FL.
  18. Marino, T. (2013, April). Universal Design for Learning in Virtual Learning Environments. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Cambridge, MA.
  19. Marino, M. T., Basham, J. D., & Beecher, C. C. (2011). Using video games as an alternative science assessment for students with disabilities and at-risk Science Scope, 34(5), 36-41.
  20. Marino, T., Basham, J. D., & White, D. (2011, March). Using video games to help students with learning disabilities and other at-risk students succeed in secondary science classes. National Science Teachers Association National Conference on Science Education. San Francisco, CA.
  1. Marino, T., Becht, K., Vasquez III, E., Gallup, J., Basham, J. D., & Gallegos, B. (2014). Enhancing secondary science content accessibility with video games. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(1), 27-34. DOI: 10.1177/0040059914542762
  2. Marino, M. T., Beecher, C. C., & Coy, K. (2012, April). Teaching with video games: Engaging ALL students in STEM Council for Exceptional Children Annual Convention. Denver, CO.
  3. Marino, T., Beecher, C. C., Delisio, L., & Becht, K. (2013, April). Increasing students’ STEM performance using video games. Council for Exceptional Children Annual Convention, San Antonio, TX.
  4. Marino, T., Black, A., Hayes, M., & Beecher, C. C. (2010). An analysis of factors that affect struggling readers’ comprehension during a technology-enhanced STEM astronomy curriculum. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(3), 35-48.
  5. Marino, T., Gotch, C., Israel, M., Vasquez, E. III, Basham, J. D., & Becht, K. M. (2014). UDL in the middle school science classroom: Can video games and alternative text heighten engagement and learning for students with learning disabilities? Learning Disability Quarterly. 37, 87-99.
  6. Marino, M. T. & Hayes, M. T. (2012). Promoting inclusive education, civic scientific literacy, and global citizenship with video Cultural Studies of Science Education 7(4). 945- 954.
  7. Marino, M. T., Israel, M., Beecher, C. C., & Basham, J. D. (2013). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of using videogames to enhance science Journal of Science Education and Technology. 22, 667-680.
  8. Marino, T., Osmond, S., Pineda, L., Merritt, G. C., Leboff, J. (2014, January). Can video games make you smarter? Otronicon – Orlando Science Center. Orlando, FL.
  9. Marino, M. T., White, D., Norton, D., Quinn, B., & Basham (2011, June). Designing middle school science games for students who struggle with reading. Games+Learning+Society Seventh Annual Conference. Madison,
  10. Markle, R.,Olivera-Aguilar, M., Jackson, T., Noeth, R., & Robbins, S. (2013). Examining Evidence of Reliability, Validity, and Fairness for the SuccessNavigator™ ETS Research report 13-12. Retrieved from 12.pdf
  11. Martin, J. K., Stumbo, N. J., Martin, L. G., Collins, K. D., Hedrick, B. N., Nordstrom, D., & Peterson, M. (2011). Recruitment of students with disabilities: Exploration of science, technology, engineering, and Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(4), 285-299.
  12. McCullough, , Deery, K., & Lawler, M. (2013). Soft skills, hard science: A program to improve job placement of STEM graduates with disabilities. Retrieved from conference/2013presentations/McCullough_WomenSci%20May2013.pdf
  13. McDuffie, , Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2009). Differential effects of peer tutoring in co-taught and non-co-taught classes: Results for content learning and student teacher interactions. Exceptional Children, 75, 493–510.
  14. Merriam, B. (2002). Qualitative Research in Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  15. Micari, M., & Drane, D. (2011). Intimidation in small learning groups: the roles of social- comparison concern, comfort, and individual characteristics in student academic Active Learning in Higher Education, 12, 175-187.
  16. Moon, N. W., Utschig, T. T., Todd, R. L., & Bozzorg, A. (2011). Evaluation of programmatic interventions to improve postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: Findings from SciTrain Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24, 331-349.
  17. Moriarty A. (2007). Inclusive pedagogy: Teaching methodologies to reach diverse learners in science instruction. Equity and Excellence in Education, 40, 252–265.
  1. National Academy of Engineering. (2014). Surmounting the Barriers: Ethnic Diversity in Engineering Education: Summary of a Washington: National Academies Press.
  2. National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering 2013.
  3. Nelson, C. (2007). Exploring the use of individualized, reflective guidance in an educational multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 83–97.
  4. Nkambou, R., Gouardères, G., & Woolf, B. P. (2005). Toward learning grid infrastructures: An overview of research on grid learning Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19(9-10), 811-824.
  5. Parker, D. R., & Boutelle, K. (2009). Executive Function Coaching for College Students with Learning Disabilities and ADHD: A New Approach for Fostering Self-Determination. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 204–215
  6. Pew Research 2011. War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center Social & Demographic Trends.
  7. Pellicano, (2012). The Development of Executive Function in Autism. Autism Research & Treatment, 1-8. DOI 10.1155/2012/146132
  8. Pintritch, R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T. & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-813.
  9. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Retrieved November 12, 2013 from pdf
  10. (2013). Software. Retrieved from
  11. Quintana, , Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, G. D. et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 337–386.
  12. Rappolt-Schlichtmann, , Daley, S.G., & Rose, T. L. (2012). A research reader in Universal Design for Learning. Boston. Harvard Education Press.
  13. Sadler, T. D., Burgin, S., McKinney, L., and Ponjuan, L. (2010). Learning science through research apprenticeships: A critical review of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 235-256.
  14. Sandi-Urena, , Cooper, M.M., and Stevens, R. H. (2011). Enhancement of metacognition use and awareness by means of a collaborative intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 323-340.
  15. Schroeder, L., Adesope, O. O., & Barouch Gilbert, R. (2013). A meta-analysis of the effects of pedagogical agents on learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49, 1-40.
  16. Siemens, 2005. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Available online at
  17. Soldner, , Rowan-Kenyon, H., Inkelas, K. K., Garvey, J., & Robbins, C. (2012). Supporting Students’ Intentions to Persist in STEM Disciplines: The Role of Living-Learning Programs Among Other Social-Cognitive Factors. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(3), 311-336.
  18. Stamp, , Banerjee, M., & Brown, F. (2014) Self-advocacy and perceptions of college readiness among students with ADHD. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 27(2).
  19. Stinson, S., Elliot, L. B., & Easton, D. (2014). Deaf/Hard of Hearing and Other Postsecondary Learners’ Retention of STEM Content With Tablet Computer-Based Notes. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 19(2), 251-269.
  20. Supalo, A., Isaacson, M. D., & Lombardi, M. V. (2014). Making Hands-On Science Learning Accessible for Students Who Are Blind or Have Low Vision. Journal of Chemical Education 91(2), 195-199.
  1. Svinicki, (2011). Synthesis of the research on teaching and learning in engineering since the implementation of ABET engineering criteria 2000. Paper presented at the Second Committee Meeting on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline-Based Education Research. Retrieved from:
  2. Swartz, L., Prevatt, F., & Proctor, B. E. (2005). A coaching intervention for college students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 647–656.
  3. Sweller, (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
  4. Thomson, C.L., Holmberg, M.C., Baer, D.M., Hodges, W.L., & Moore, S.G. (1978). An experimental analysis of some procedures to teach priming and reinforcement skills to preschool teachers. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 43 (4), 1-86.
  5. UDL-IRN (2011). Critical Elements of UDL in Instruction (Version 3). Lawrence, KS: Author Retrieved February 25, 2012 from http://udl-
  6. Utschig, T., Moon, N. W., Todd, R. L., & Bozzorg, A. (2011). Faculty efficacy in creating productive learning environments: Universal design and the lens of students with disabilities. International Journal of Process Education, 3(1), 51-64.
  7. Vasquez, , Straub, C., Nagendran, A., Walsh, G., Marino, M., Hughes, C., & Russel, M. (In Review). A comparison of simulated and traditional environments on the social responses for children with autism. FOCUS on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities.
  8. Walker, Z. (2012). Providing coaching on employability skills for students with intellectual disabilities in a virtual (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.
  9. Wei, X., Christiano, E. R., Jennifer, W. Y., Blackorby, J., Shattuck, P., & Newman, L. A. (2013). Postsecondary Pathways and Persistence for STEM Versus Non-STEM Majors: Among College Students with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1-9. DOI 1007/s10801-013-1978-5.
  10. Woolf, & Eliot, C. (2005). Customizing the Instructional Grid, Applied Artificial Intelligence, Special issue on GRID Learning Services, 19 p. 45.
  11. Woolf, P., Arroyo, I., Beal, C. R., & Murray, T. (2006). Gender and Cognitive Differences in Help Effectiveness During Problem Solving. International Journal of Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 3, 89–95.
  12. Yarbrough, D. B., Shulha, L. M., Hopson, R. K., and Caruthers, F. A. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  13. Youngju, , Jaeho, C., & Taehyun, K. (2013). Discriminating factors between completers of and dropouts from virtual learning courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 328-337.
  14. Zeiser, L., Krishstein, R. J., & Tanenbaum, C. (2013). How much does it cost institutions to produce STEM degrees? Center for STEM Education & Innovation at American Institutes for Research.