ABSTRACT
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
Educators often are asked to provide information regarding students' responses to medication used for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We designed a questionnaire to determine the knowledge and attitudes of educators regarding stimulants. Two hundred ninety-one regular classroom and special education teachers in two Ohio school systems received the questionnaire; the overall response rate was 65%. Our findings suggest that educators generally believe stimulants are useful for students with ADHD and that they frequently recommend them to parents. However, educators indicated their knowledge of the effects of stimulants was limited and that they had received little education about stimulants. Physicians requesting input from educators regarding students taking stimulants should be aware of the limitations of educators' knowledge and participate in the development of programs to improve that knowledge.
