Exceptional Children

A tenet of multitiered systems of support and response to intervention (MTSS-RTI) is that lack of response to instructional intervention is explained by classroom experiences and behaviors given opportunities to learn. We investigated the potential of filling this information gap in MTSS-RTI decision making using ecobehavioral observation to inform steps that could be taken for children not responding to preschool literacy instruction. Data analyses indicated that (a) teachers implemented a uniform pattern of daily activities providing children with infrequent opportunity to learn literacy, (b) the proportion of children’s co-occurring academic engagement also was low but varied widely depending on the activity and teacher’s literacy focus, and (c) children’s personal risk characteristics moderated the strength of relationships. Novel was the finding that in some activities and teacher behaviors, teachers appeared to be differentiating instruction benefiting children with individualized education programs and dual-language-learner risk. Implications are discussed.

In the current study we examined the effect of a self-regulated strategy development intervention on the fraction calculations of students with or at risk for disabilities using a multiple-baseline-across-sites, single-case design. Specifically, the intervention package addressed the following skills: adding and subtracting fractions with unlike denominators, simplifying fractions, and converting improper fractions to mixed numbers. The intervention was implemented with high levels of treatment fidelity and social validity across three separate intervention agents. Results of the study showed the intervention to be effective, with 15 of the 16 participants making marked gains on fraction probes. We discuss the results of the study with respect to the research questions, provide limitations to the study, and propose areas for future research.

Researchers have investigated the simultaneous prompting (SP) procedure across three decades; however, no meta-analysis has been conducted. In the present systematic review, we conducted both a descriptive and meta-analysis of SP studies from a seminal publication of an SP study through 2017. Our search resulted in 20 studies published in English in internationally disseminated peer-reviewed journals that used single-case methodology and also met criteria for methodological rigor. To analyze effect sizes, we used percentage of non-overlapping points and Tau-U, with both revealing highly consistent results. We concluded that there is a substantial body of evidence to support the SP procedure to teach a variety of skills to individuals with disabilities when consistent parameters of the procedure are employed; however, future research is needed to specifically validate the procedure as effective in regard to specific types of disability (e.g., autism spectrum disorder) and specific types of tasks.

Federal policies have aimed to improve access to grade-level curriculum for students with disabilities (SWD). Current conceptualizations of access posit that it is evidenced by students’ academic outcomes. In a meta-analysis of 180 effect sizes from 23 studies, we examined access as outcomes by estimating the size of the gap in reading achievement between students with and without disabilities. Findings indicated that SWDs performed 1.17 standard deviations, or more than 3 years, below typically developing peers. The reading gap varied by disability label but not by other student and assessment characteristics. We discuss implications for access to grade-level curriculum and potential reasons for why the achievement gap is so large despite existing policies.

Empirical studies investigating supplemental reading interventions for students with or at risk for reading disabilities in the early elementary grades have demonstrated a range of effect sizes. Identifying the findings from high-quality research can provide greater certainty of findings related to the effectiveness of supplemental reading interventions. This meta-analysis investigated how four variables of study quality (study design, statistical treatment, Type I error, and fidelity of implementation) were related to effect sizes from standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language and comprehension. The results from 88 studies indicated that year of publication was a significant predictor of effect sizes for both standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language and comprehension, with more recent studies demonstrating smaller effect sizes. Results also demonstrated that with the exception of research design predicting effect sizes on foundational reading skills measures, study quality was not related to the effects of supplemental reading interventions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Proficiency with fractions is one of the most significant predictors of later mathematics achievement. However, there are currently no meta-analyses that assess the literature base on fractions for students with or at risk for disabilities using quality indicators. We applied the 2014 Council for Exceptional Children Standards for Evidence-Based Practices in Special Education (CEC EBP) to 21 studies, both single-case and group designs, with instructionally based fraction interventions, published from 1986 to 2017. Ten of the included studies met all of the CEC EBP quality indicators, and effect sizes ranged from g = 0.42 to 11.51 across interventions. Publication bias was mixed but limited across the research base. Included studies examined the effects of anchored instruction, explicit instruction, graduated instruction, strategy instruction, and video modeling; explicit instruction was determined to be an evidence-based practice when applying the CEC EBP standards. We offer limitations and directions for future research in this area.