This study investigated the differential effects of two problem-solving instructional approaches--schema-based instruction (SBI) and general strategy instruction (GSI)--on the mathematical word problem-solving performance of 22 middle school students who had learning disabilities or were at risk for mathematics failure. Results indicated that the SBI group significantly outperformed the GSI group on immediate and delayed posttests as well as the transfer test. Implications of the study are discussed within the context of the new IDEA amendment and access to the general education curriculum.