Advertisement

Journal of Behavioral Education

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 107–140 | Cite as

Teaching Non-target Information to Children with Disabilities: An Examination of Instructive Feedback Literature

  • Susanne A. AlbarranEmail author
  • Micheal P. Sandbank
Original Paper

Abstract

Systematic trial-based learning procedures are commonly used to teach students with disabilities in special education settings. Instructive feedback is a procedure created to increase the efficiency of trial-based learning procedures. It involves the planned addition of non-target information that is systematically placed in the consequent events of learning trials. This systematic review examines the instructive feedback literature that was conducted since the only previous review was published in 1995. An extensive search of published and gray literature yielded a total of 54 eligible studies. Across studies, participants acquired an average of 64% of the non-target information presented through the instructive feedback procedure. In group studies of instructive feedback, participants exhibited an average gain of 55% of the extra information provided to peers. Results suggest that the instructive feedback procedure can be used to increase the efficiency of trial-based learning for students with disabilities of all ages. Instructive feedback is recommended as an effective strategy for enhancing trial-based teaching procedures for students with disabilities.

Keywords

Instructive feedback Special education Discrete trial teaching Systematic review 

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the Review

  1. *Alotaibi, B. N. (2002). The use of constant time delay in the acquisition of incidental learning when teaching functional sight word/phrases recognition to students with moderate and severe disabilities. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  2. *Anthony, L., Wolery, M., Werts, M. G., Caldwell, N. K., & Snyder, E. D. (1996). Effects of daily probing on acquisition of instructive feedback responses. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(2), 111–133.Google Scholar
  3. *Appelman, M., Vail, C. O., & Lieberman-Betz, R. G. (2014). The effects of constant time delay and instructive feedback on the acquisition of English and Spanish sight words. Journal of Early Intervention, 36(2), 131–148.Google Scholar
  4. *Apple, A. L. (2005). A comparison of the use of constant time delay alone and constant time delay with instructive feedback to teach children with autism to discriminate stimuli by function, feature and class. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  5. Ault, M. J., Wolery, M., Doyle, P. M., & Gast, D. L. (1989). Review of comparative studies in the instruction of students with moderate and severe handicaps. Exceptional Children, 55(4), 346–356.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. *Berrong, A. K. (2011). Using computer assisted instruction to teach science facts to students with moderate to severe disabilities. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  7. Billingsley, F. F., & Romer, L. T. (1983). Response prompting and the transfer of stimulus control: Methods, research, and a conceptual framework. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8(2), 3–12.Google Scholar
  8. Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of educational research, 51(1), 5–32.Google Scholar
  9. Browder, D. M., Morris, W. W., & Snell, M. E. (1981). Using time delay to teach manual signs to a severely retarded student. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 16(4), 252–258.Google Scholar
  10. *Caldwell, N. K., Wolery, M., Werts, M. G., & Caldwell, Y. (1996). Embedding instructive feedback into teacher-student interactions during independent seat work. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(4), 459–480.Google Scholar
  11. *Campbell, M. L., & Mechling, L. C. (2009). Small group computer-assisted instruction with smart board technology: An investigation of observational and incidental learning of nontarget information. Remedial and Special Education, 30(1), 47–57.Google Scholar
  12. *Carroll, R. A., & Kodak, T. (2015). Using instructive feedback to increase response variability during intraverbal training for children with autism spectrum disorder. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 31(2), 183–199.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. *Collins, B. C., Branson, T. A., & Hall, M. (1995). Teaching generalized reading of cooking product labels to adolescents with mental disabilities through the use of key words taught by peer tutors. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30(1), 65–75.Google Scholar
  14. *Collins, B. C., Terrell, M., & Test, D. W. (2017). Using a simultaneous prompting procedure to embed core content when teaching a potential employment skill. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 40(1), 36–44.Google Scholar
  15. *Colozzi, G. A., Ward, L. W., & Crotty, K. E. (2008). Comparison of simultaneous prompting procedure in 1: 1 and small group instruction to teach play skills to preschool students with pervasive developmental disorder and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(2), 226–248.Google Scholar
  16. *Colyer, S. P., & Collins, B. C. (1996). Using natural cues within prompt levels to teach the next dollar strategy to students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 30(3), 305–318.Google Scholar
  17. *Cromer, K., Schuster, J. W., Collins, B. C., & Grisham-Brown, J. (1998). Teaching information on medical prescriptions using two instructive feedback schedules. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8(1), 37–61.Google Scholar
  18. *Delmolino, L., Hansford, A. P., Bamond, M. J., Fiske, K. E., & LaRue, R. H. (2013). The use of instructive feedback for teaching language skills to children with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(6), 648–661.Google Scholar
  19. Demchak, M. (1990). Response prompting and fading methods: A review. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94(6), 603–615.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Doyle, P. M., Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., & Farmer, J. A. (1990a). Use of constant time delay in small group instruction: A study of observational and incidental learning. The Journal of Special Education, 23(4), 369–385.Google Scholar
  21. Doyle, P. M., Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., & Gast, D. L. (1988). System of least prompts: A literature review of procedural parameters. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 13(1), 28–40.Google Scholar
  22. Doyle, P. M., Wolery, M., Gast, D. L., Ault, M. J., & Wiley, K. (1990b). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching preschoolers with developmental delays. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 11(1), 1–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. *Falkenstine, K. J., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Kleinert, H. (2009). Presenting chained and discrete tasks as non-targeted information when teaching discrete academic skills through small group instruction. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44(1), 127–142.Google Scholar
  24. *Fetko, E. E., Collins, B. C., Hager, K. D., & Spriggs, A. D. (2013). Embedding science facts in leisure skill instruction conducted by peer tutors. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 48(3), 400–411.Google Scholar
  25. *Fiscus, R. S., Schuster, J. W., Morse, T. E., & Collins, B. C. (2002). Teaching elementary students with cognitive disabilities food preparation skills while embedding instructive feedback in the prompt and consequent event. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(1), 55–69.Google Scholar
  26. Gast, D. L., Ault, M. J., Wolery, M., Doyle, P. M., & Belanger, S. (1988). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching sight word reading to students with moderate retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 23(2), 117–128.Google Scholar
  27. Gersten, R., Woodward, J., & Darch, C. (1986). Direct instruction: A research-based approach to curriculum design and teaching. Exceptional Children, 53(1), 17–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gibson, A. N., & Schuster, J. W. (1992). The use of simultaneous prompting for teaching expressive word recognition to preschool children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 12(2), 247–267.Google Scholar
  29. *Griffen, A. K., Schuster, J. W., & Morse, T. E. (1998). The acquisition of instructive feedback: A comparison of continuous versus intermittent presentation schedules. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), 42–61.Google Scholar
  30. *Grow, L. L., Kodak, T., & Clements, A. (2017). An evaluation of instructive feedback to teach play behavior to a child with autism spectrum disorder. Behavior analysis in practice, 10(3), 313–317.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. *Gursel, O., Tekin-Iftar, E., & Bozkurt, F. (2006). Effectiveness of simultaneous prompting in small group: The opportunity of acquiring non-target skills through observational learning and instructive feedback. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41(3), 225–243.Google Scholar
  32. *Haq, S. S., Zemantic, P. K., Kodak, T., LeBlanc, B., & Ruppert, T. E. (2017). Examination of variables that affect the efficacy of instructive feedback. Behavioral Interventions, 32(3), 206–216.Google Scholar
  33. Holcombe, A., Wolery, M., Werts, M. G., & Hrenkevich, P. (1993). Effects of instructive feedback on future learning. Journal of Behavioral Education, 3(3), 259–285.Google Scholar
  34. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179.Google Scholar
  35. *Johnson, P., Schuster, J., & Bell, J. K. (1996). Comparison of simultaneous prompting with and without error correction in teaching science vocabulary words to high school students with mild disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(4), 437–458.Google Scholar
  36. *Jones, G. Y., & Collins, B. C. (1997). Teaching microwave skills to adults with disabilities: Acquisition of nutrition and safety facts presented as nontargeted information. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 9(1), 59–78.Google Scholar
  37. Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Pearson/A & B.Google Scholar
  38. *Lane, J. D., Gast, D. L., Shepley, C., & Ledford, J. R. (2015). Including social opportunities during small group instruction of preschool children with social-communication delays. Journal of Early Intervention, 37(1), 3–22.Google Scholar
  39. *Leaf, J. B., Cihon, J. H., Alcalay, A., Mitchell, E., Townley-Cochran, D., Miller, K., et al. (2017). Instructive feedback embedded within group instruction for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50(2), 304–316.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. *Ledford, J. R., Gast, D. L., Luscre, D., & Ayres, K. M. (2008). Observational and incidental learning by children with autism during small group instruction. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(1), 86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Loughrey, T. O., Betz, A. M., Majdalany, L. M., & Nicholson, K. (2014). Using instructive feedback to teach category names to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47(2), 425–430.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Morse, T. E., & Schuster, J. W. (2004). Simultaneous prompting: A review of the literature. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 39(2), 153–168.Google Scholar
  43. *Nottingham, C. L., Vladescu, J. C., Kodak, T., & Kisamore, A. N. (2017). Incorporating multiple secondary targets into learning trials for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50(3), 653–661.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. *Olszewski, A., Soto, X., & Goldstein, H. (2017). Modeling alphabet skills as instructive feedback within a phonological awareness intervention. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 26(3), 769–790.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. *Özkan, Ş. Y., & Gürsel, O. (2011). Comparison of simultaneous prompting with continuous probe sessions and intermittent probe sessions. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 45, 69–88.Google Scholar
  46. Palmer, T., Collins, B. C., & Schuster, J. W. (1999). The use of a simultaneous prompting procedure to teach receptive manual sign identification to adults with disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 11(2), 179–191.Google Scholar
  47. *Parker, M. A., & Schuster, J. W. (2002). Effectiveness of simultaneous prompting on the acquisition of observational and instructive feedback stimuli when teaching a heterogeneous group of high school students. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(1), 89–104.Google Scholar
  48. *Parrott, K. A., Schuster, J. W., Collins, B. C., & Gassaway, L. J. (2000). Simultaneous prompting and instructive feedback when teaching chained tasks. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(1), 3–19.Google Scholar
  49. *Pennington, R. C., Collins, B. C., Stenhoff, D. M., Turner, K., & Gunselman, K. (2014). Using simultaneous prompting and computer-assisted instruction to teach narrative writing skills to students with autism. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49(3), 396–414.Google Scholar
  50. *Reichow, B. R. (2008). Comparison of progressive time delay with instructive feedback and progressive time delay without instructive feedback for children with autism spectrum disorders. Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University.Google Scholar
  51. Reichow, B., Volkmar, F. R., & Cicchetti, D. V. (2008). Development of the evaluative method for evaluating and determining evidence-based practices in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(7), 1311–1319.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. *Riggs, L., Collins, B. C., Kleinert, H., & Knight, V. F. (2013). Teaching principles of heredity to high school students with moderate and severe disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(1), 30–43.Google Scholar
  53. *Rohena-Diaz, E. I. (1998). The comparable effects of Spanish and English instruction on sight word reading using a constant time delay and incidental teaching procedures by Hispanic learners with mental retardation. Doctoral Dissertation, Lehigh University.Google Scholar
  54. *Ross, A. H., & Stevens, K. B. (2003). Teaching spelling of social studies content vocabulary prior to using the vocabulary in inclusive learning environments: An examination of constant time delay, observational learning, and instructive feedback. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12(4), 287–309.Google Scholar
  55. *Ryan, D. D. (1999). A comparison of constant time delay and constant time delay with instructive feedback in teaching multiplication facts to children at-risk for failure in school. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University.Google Scholar
  56. Schuster, J. W., Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., & Guiltinan, S. (1988). The effectiveness of a constant time-delay procedure to teach chained responses to adolescents with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21(2), 169–178.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. *Schuster, J. W., Morse, T. E., Griffen, A. B., & Wolery, T. (1996). Teaching peer reinforcement and grocery words: An investigation of observational learning and instructive feedback. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(4), 511–533.Google Scholar
  58. *Shepley, C., Lane, J. D., & Gast, D. L. (2016). Using SMART board technology to teach young students with disabilities and limited group learning experience to read environmental text. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 51(4), 404.Google Scholar
  59. Sindelar, P. T., Rosenberg, M. S., & Wilson, R. J. (1985). An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research. Education and Treatment of Children, 8(1), 67–76.Google Scholar
  60. *Singleton, K. C., Schuster, J. W., & Ault, M. J. (1995). Simultaneous prompting in a small group instructional arrangement. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30(30), 218–230.Google Scholar
  61. Snell, M. E. (1983). Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  62. Snell, M. E., & Brown, F. E. (2011). Instruction of students with severe disabilities: Seventh Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  63. Snell, M. E., & Gast, D. L. (1981). Applying time delay procedure to the instruction of the severely handicapped. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6(3), 3–14.Google Scholar
  64. *Stewart, S. R., Gonzalez, L. S., & Page, J. L. (1997). Incidental learning of sight words during articulation training. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 28(2), 115–126.Google Scholar
  65. Sutherland, K. S., Copeland, S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). Catch them while you can: Monitoring and increasing the use of effective praise. Beyond Behavior, 11(1), 46–49.Google Scholar
  66. *Taylor, P., Collins, B. C., Schuster, J. W., & Kleinert, H. (2002). Teaching laundry skills to high school students with disabilities: Generalization of targeted skills and nontargeted information. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(2), 172–183.Google Scholar
  67. *Tekin-Iftar, E. (2003). Effectiveness of peer delivered simultaneous prompting on teaching community signs to students with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(1), 77–94.Google Scholar
  68. *Tekin-Iftar, E., Acar, G., & Kurt, O. (2003). The effects of simultaneous prompting on teaching expressive identification of objects: An instructive feedback study. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 50(2), 149–167.Google Scholar
  69. *Tekin-Iftar, E., Kurt, O., & Acar, G. (2008). Enhancing instructional efficiency through generalization and instructive feedback: A single-subject study with children with mental retardation. International Journal of Special Education, 23(1), 147–158.Google Scholar
  70. Thompson, M., Tiwari, A., Fu, R., Moe, E., & Buckley, D. I. (2012). A framework to facilitate the use of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the design of primary research studies.Google Scholar
  71. Touchette, P. E. (1971). Transfer of stimulus control: Measuring the moment of transfer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15(3), 347–354.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. *Tullis, C. A., Frampton, S. E., Delfs, C. H., & Shillingsburg, M. A. (2017). Teaching problem explanations using instructive feedback. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 33(1), 64–79.Google Scholar
  73. *Vladescu, J. C., & Kodak, T. M. (2013). Increasing instructional efficiency by presenting additional stimuli in learning trials for children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(4), 805–816.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. *Wall, M. E., & Gast, D. L. (1999). Acquisition of incidental information during instruction for a response-chain skill. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 20(1), 31–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. *Werts, M. G., Caldwell, N. K., & Wolery, M. (2003). Instructive feedback: Effects of a presentation variable. The Journal of Special Education, 37(2), 124–133.Google Scholar
  76. *Werts, M. G., Hoffman, E. M., & Darcy, C. (2011). Acquisition of instructive feedback: Relation to target stimulus. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46(1), 134–149.Google Scholar
  77. Werts, M. G., Wolery, M., Holcombe, A., & Gast, D. L. (1995). Instructive feedback: Review of parameters and effects. Journal of Behavioral Education, 5(1), 55–75.Google Scholar
  78. Werts, M. G., Wolery, M., Holcombe-Ligon, A., Vassilaros, M. A., & Billings, S. S. (1992). Efficacy of transition-based teaching with instructive feedback. Education and Treatment of Children, 15(4), 320–334.Google Scholar
  79. *Werts, M. G., Wolery, M., Venn, M. L., Demblowski, D., & Doren, H. (1996). Effects of transition-based teaching with instructive feedback on skill acquisition by children with and without disabilities. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(2), 75–86.Google Scholar
  80. *Whalen, C., Schuster, J. W., & Hemmeter, M. L. (1996). The use of unrelated instructive feedback when teaching in a small group instructional arrangement. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 31(1), 188–202.Google Scholar
  81. Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., Doyle, P. M., & Gast, D. L. (1986). Comparison of instructional strategies: A literature review. (U.S. Department of Education, Grant No. G008530197). Lexington, KY: Department of Special Education.Google Scholar
  82. Wolery, M., Doyle, P. M., Ault, M. J., Gast, D. L., Meyer, S., & Stinson, D. (1991). Effects of presenting incidental information in consequent events on future learning. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(1), 79–104.Google Scholar
  83. Wolery, M., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Effective and efficient procedures for the transfer of stimulus control. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4(3), 52–77.Google Scholar
  84. *Wolery, T. D., Schuster, J. W., & Collins, B. C. (2000). Effects on future learning of presenting non-target stimuli in antecedent and consequent conditions. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(2), 77–94.Google Scholar
  85. Yalçin, I., & Akmanoğlu, N. (2013). Eşzamanli ipucuyla öğretim yönteminin otistik bir çocuğa ingilizce kelime öğretimi üzerine etkileri: hedeflenmeyen bilgi öğretimi. Journal of Academic Studies, 15(58), 117–140.Google Scholar
  86. Zigmond, N., & Kloo, A. (2011). General and special education are (and should be) different. In J. M. Kauffman & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 160–172). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Early Childhood Special Education, College of EducationThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations