Legislations mandates that educators use evidence–based practices (EBPs) that are supported by scientifically based research. EBPs have demonstrated a likelihood to work for students with disabilities. EBPs should match targeted needs of the student receiving the instruction, which sometimes requires educators to search for the best intervention to meet specific student needs. This article discusses the impetus for practices supported by evidence, where to find interventions and strategies, and what to do when targeted interventions do not exist. Additionally, this article emphasizes the need to evaluate effectiveness of intervention at the student level.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherA., & HughesC. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford.
2.
AspirantiK. B., SkinnerC. H., McClearyD. F., & CihakD. F. (2011). Using taped–problems and rewards to increase addition–fact fluency in a first grade general education classroom. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 4(2), 25–33.
3.
BlissS. L., SkinnerC. H., McCallumE., SaeckerL. B., Rowland–BryantE., & BrownK. S. (2010). A comparison of taped problems with and without a brief post–treatment assessment on multiplication fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 156–168. doi: 10.1007/s10864-010-9106-5
4.
BurnsM. K., Riley–TillmanT. C., & VanDerHeydenA. M. (2012). Advanced RTI applications, Volume 1: Intervention design and implementation. New York, NY: Guilford.
5.
ClarkeB., SmolkowskiK., BakerS. K., FienH., DoablerC. T., & ChardD. J. (2011). The impact of a comprehensive tier 1 core kindergarten program on the achievement of students at risk in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 111(4), 561–584.
6.
CookB. G., BuysseV., KlingnerJ., LandrumT. J., McWilliamR. A., TankersleyM., et al. (2015). CEC's standards for classifying the evidence base of practices in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 220–234. doi: 10.1177/0741932514557271
7.
CookB. G., & CookS. C. (2013). Unraveling evidence–based practices in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 47, 71–82. doi: 10.1177/0033466911420877
8.
CookB. G., TankersleyM., CookL., & LandrumT. J. (2008). Evidence–based practices in special education: Some practical considerations. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(2), 69–75. doi: 10.1177/1053451208321452
9.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Council for Exceptional Children standards for evidence–based practices in special education. Arlington, VA: Author.
FoegenA., JibanC., & DenoS. (2007). Progress monitoring measures in mathematics: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 41 (2), 121–139.
12.
FuchsL. S., SchumacherR. F., LongJ., NamkungJ., HamlettC. L., CirinoP. T., et al. (2013). Improving at–risk learners’ understanding of fractions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 683–700. doi: 10.1037/a0032446
13.
KretlowA. G., & HelfS. S. (2013). Teacher implementation of evidence–based practices in Tier 1: A national survey. Teacher Education and Special Education, 3, 167–185. doi: 10.1177/0888406413489838
14.
HughesE. M. (in press). Core algebra instruction. In WitzelB. S. (Ed.), Bridging the gap between arithmetic & algebra (pp. 51–67). Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
McCallumE., & SchmittA. J. (2011). The taped problems intervention: Increasing the math fact fluency of a student with an intellectual disability. International Journal of Special Education, 26, 276–284.
17.
MetheS. A., HojnoskiR., ClarkeB., OwensB. B., LilleyP. K., PolityloB. C., et al. (2011). Innovations and future directions for early numeracy curriculum–based measurement: Commentary on the special series. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 200–209. doi: 10.1188/1534508411414154
18.
MontagueM., EndersC., & DietzS. (2011). Effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 262–272. doi: 10.1177/0731948712463368
19.
MontagueM., KrawecJ., EndersC., & DietzS. (2014). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle school students of varying ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 469–481. doi: 10.1037/a0035176
20.
MontagueM., WargerC. & MorganT. H. (2000). Solve It! Strategy instruction to improve mathematical problem solving. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15, 110–116. doi: 10.1207/sldrp1502_7
21.
MorganP. L., FarkasG., & WuQ. (2009). Five–year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 306–321. doi: 10.1177/0022219408331037
22.
MostertM. P., (2010). Asserting the fanciful over the empirical: Introduction to the special issue. Exceptionality, 18, 1–5. doi: 10.1080/09362830903462409
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards Mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.
25.
PoncyB. C., SkinnerC. H., & McCallumE. (2012). Comparison of class–wide taped problems and cover, copy, and compare for enhancing mathematics fluency. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 744–755. doi: 10.1002/pits.21631
26.
PowellS. R., & FuchsL. S. (2015). Intensive intervention in mathematics. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 30, 182–192. doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12087
27.
ShalevR. S., AuerbachJ., ManorO., & Gross–TsurV. (2000). Developmental dyscalculia: Prevalence and prognosis. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 9, 58–64. doi: 10.1007/s007870070009
28.
StahmerA. C., ReithS., LeeE., ReisingerE. M., MandellD. S., & ConnellJ. E. (2015). Training teachers to use evidence–based practices for autism: Examining procedural implementation fidelity. Psychology in the Schools, 52, 181–195.
29.
WeiX., LenzK., & BlackorbyJ. (2013). Math growth trajectories of students with disabilities: Disability category, gender, racial, and SES differences. Remedial and Special Education34, 154–165. doi:10.1177/0741932512448253.
