ABSTRACT
We compared active student response (ASR) error correction and no-response (NR) error correction while teaching science terms to 5 elementary students. When a student erred on ASR terms, the teacher modeled the definition and the student repeated it. When a student erred on NR terms, the teacher modeled the definition while the student looked at the vocabulary card. ASR error correction was superior on each of the study's seven dependent variables.
ABSTRACT
We compared immediate and delayed error correction during sight-word instruction with 5 students with developmental disabilities. Whole-word error correction immediately followed each error for words in the immediate condition. In the delayed condition, whole-word error correction was provided at the end of each session's three practice rounds. Immediate error correction was superior on each of the four dependent variables.
Subject(s)
Education of Intellectually Disabled , Memory, Short-Term , Reading , Retention, Psychology , Verbal Learning , Behavior Therapy , Child , Female , Humans , Male , Practice, PsychologicalABSTRACT
A multiple baseline design across subjects with a reversal was used to examine the effects of classwide peer tutoring relative to traditional reading instruction on reading skills and social interaction time for 3 high-functioning students with autism and their typical peers in integrated, general education classrooms. Traditional reading instruction consisted largely of teacher-led instruction with individual student participation and seat work. Classwide peer tutoring consisted of 25 to 30 min of well-specified instruction in which tutor-learner pairs worked together on a classwide basis on reading fluency and comprehension skills. All students participated in 15- to 20-min unstructured free-time activities immediately following reading instruction. Results of reading assessments demonstrated that classwide peer tutoring increased reading fluency and correct responses to reading comprehension questions for students with autism and their peers. The procedure further increased the total duration of free-time social interactions for students with autism and typical peers, with individual variation in performance.
Subject(s)
Autistic Disorder/therapy , Mainstreaming, Education , Peer Group , Reading , Remedial Teaching , Social Behavior , Autistic Disorder/psychology , Child , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Mental Recall , Social AdjustmentABSTRACT
We used an alternating treatments design to compare the effects of active student response error correction and no-response error correction during sight word instruction. Six students with developmental disabilities were provided one-to-one daily sight word instruction on eight sets of 20 unknown words. Each set of 20 words was divided randomly into two equal groups. Student errors during instruction on one group of words were immediately followed by the teacher modeling the word and the student repeating it (active student response instruction). Errors on the other group of words were immediately followed by the teacher modeling the word while the student attended to the word card (no-response instruction). For all 6 students, the active student response error-correction procedure resulted in more words read correctly during instruction, same-day tests, next-day tests, 2-week maintenance tests, and generality tests (words read in sentences).
Subject(s)
Education of Intellectually Disabled/methods , Feedback , Generalization, Psychological , Mental Recall , Phonetics , Verbal Learning , Child , Female , Humans , Male , Memory, Short-Term , Reading , Retention, Psychology , VocabularyABSTRACT
We used an alternating treatments design to compare the effects of two procedures for correcting student errors during sight word drills. Each of the 5 participating students with developmental disabilities was provided daily one-to-one instruction on individualized sets of 14 unknown words. Each week's new set of unknown words was divided randomly into two groups of equal size. Student errors during instruction were immediately followed by whole-word error correction (the teacher stated the complete word and the student repeated it) for one group of words and by phonetic-prompt error correction (the teacher provided phonetic prompts) for the other group of words. During instruction, all 5 students read correctly a higher percentage of whole-word corrected words than phonetic-prompt corrected words. Data from same-day tests (immediately following instruction) and next-day tests showed the students learned more words taught with whole-word error correction than they learned with phonetic-prompt error correction.
