Comparing Brief Experimental Analysis and Teacher Judgment for Selecting Early Reading Interventions
- 225 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to examine the use of brief experimental analysis (BEA) to identify early reading interventions for students in the primary grades and to compare teachers’ judgments about their students’ early reading intervention needs to BEA results. In addition, the research was conducted to explore how teachers make decisions regarding early reading intervention selection and evaluation. Three teachers and three elementary students (two kindergarten and one second grade) participated in the study. A BEA using a multielement design with mini-reversals was used to test the effects of four different interventions. Each teacher selected an intervention that she judged to be the most promising for her student. An extended analysis using an alternating treatments design compared the relative effects of the BEA-identified intervention and the teacher-identified intervention across time. The teachers were interviewed before and after selecting and implementing the interventions. The extended analysis results showed that the BEA-identified intervention was more effective than the teacher-identified intervention for all participants. Initial and final interview findings revealed that the teachers reported using data to make intervention decisions, but with limited specificity and in some cases, misjudgments. The results are discussed in regard to limitations and future research.
KeywordsBrief experimental analysis Teacher judgment Early reading
- Begeny, J. C., Eckert, T. L., Montarello, S., & Storie, M. S. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of students’ reading abilities: An examination of the relationship between teachers’ judgments and students’performance across a continuum of rating methods. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Begeny, J. C., Krouse, H. E., Brown, K. G., & Mann, C. M. (2011). Teacher judgments of students’ reading abilities across a continuum of rating methods and achievement measures. School Psychology Review, 40, 23–38.Google Scholar
- Burns, M. K., & Wagner, D. (2008). Determining an effective intervention with brief experimental analysis for reading: A meta-analytic review. School Psychology Review, 37, 126–136.Google Scholar
- Chafouleas, S. M., Riley-Tillman, C., & Eckert, T. L. (2003). A comparison of school psychologists’ acceptability, training, and use of norm-referenced, curriculum-based, and brief experimental analysis methods to assess reading. School Psychology Review, 32, 272–282.Google Scholar
- Christ, T. J., Ardoin, S., Monaghen, B., VanNorman, E., & White, M. J. (2013). CBM reading: Technical manual. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Educational Psychology.Google Scholar
- Daly, E. J., III, Persampieri, M., McCurdy, M., & Gortmaker, B. (2005). Generating reading interventions through experimental analysis of academic skills: Demonstration and empirical evaluation. School Psychology Review, 34, 395–414.Google Scholar
- Daly, E. J., III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554–574.Google Scholar
- Deno, S. L. (2005). Problem-solving assessment. In R. Brown-Chidsey & K. J. Andren (Eds.), Assessment for intervention: A problem solving approach (pp. 10–38). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Duhon, G. J., Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Freeland, J. T., Dufrene, B. A., & Gilbertson, D. N. (2004). Identifying academic skills and performance deficits: The experimental analysis of brief assessments of academic skills. School Psychology Review, 33, 429–443.Google Scholar
- Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington: DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/.
- Hamilton, C., & Shinn, M. R. (2003). Characteristics of word callers: An investigation of the accuracy of teachers’ judgments of reading comprehension and oral reading skills. School Psychology Review, 32, 228–240.Google Scholar
- Jones, K. M., & Wickstrom, K. F. (2002). Done in sixty seconds: Further analysis of the brief assessment model for academic problems. School Psychology Review, 31, 554–568.Google Scholar
- Joseph, L. M. (2002). Facilitating word recognition and spelling using word boxes and word sort phonic procedures. School Psychology Review, 31, 122–129.Google Scholar
- Miltenberger, R. G. (2007). Behavior modification principles and procedures (4th ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
- National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). A first look: 2013 Mathematics and reading national assessment of educational progress at grades 4 and 8. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/main2013/pdf/2014451.pdf.
- National Center on Intensive Intervention. (2013). Data-based individualization: A framework for intensive intervention. Retrieved from http://www.intensiveintervention.org/sites/default/files/DBI_Framework.pdf.
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report to the National reading panel, teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
- National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
- Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J., & Bolt, S. (2011). Assessment in special and inclusive education (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
- Shapiro, E. S. (2010). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Torgeson, J. K. (2004). Avoiding the downward spiral: The evidence that early intervention prevents reading failure. American Educator, 3, 6–19.Google Scholar
- Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., & Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.Google Scholar