This article discusses how three low-tech instructional strategies, typically used in face-to-face teaching, can be successfully used in synchronous and asynchronous online instruction with students with high-incidence disabilities and their typical-learning peers in inclusive online classes. The three strategies are choral responding, response cards, and guided notes. Each strategy has been researched extensively and has been shown to result in high levels of active student responding, which improves students’ learning with and without disabilities across various academic subjects and grade levels. With high-tech tools, such as video conferencing platforms and learning management systems, educators can successfully use these strategies during online teaching. This article describes each strategy, presents research on its effectiveness, and suggests potential adaptations when used during inclusive online instruction, including students with high-incidence disabilities and those at-risk.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsonR. M.LewisT. J. (2017). A comparison of three opportunity-to-respond strategies on the academic engaged time among high school students who present challenging behavior. Behavioral Disorders, 42(2), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742916688644
2.
BondyA.TincaniM. (2018). Effects of response cards on students with autism spectrum disorder or intellectual disability. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 53(1), 59–72.
3.
CavanaughC.RepetoJ.WayerN.SpitierC. (2013). Online learning for students with disabilities: A framework for success. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341302800101
4.
CommonE. A.LaneK. L.CantwellE. D.BrunstingN. C.OakesW. P.GermerK. A.BrossL. A. (2020). Teacher-delivered strategies to increase students’ opportunities to respond: A systematic methodological review. Behavioral Disorders, 45(2), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742919828310
5.
CrouseT. M.RiceM. F.MellardD. F. (2016). How did I survive? Online teachers describe learning to teach students with disabilities. Center on Online Instruction and Students With Disabilities, University of Kansas. http://hdl.handle.net/1808/22567
6.
DuhonG. J.HouseS.HastingsK.PoncyB.SolomonB. (2015). Adding immediate feedback to explicit timing: An option for enhancing treatment intensity to improve mathematics fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24, 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-014-9203-y
7.
DuchaineE.GreenK. B.JolivetteK. (2011). Using response cards as a class-wide intervention to decrease challenging behavior. Beyond Behavior, 20(1), 3–10.
8.
DuchaineE. L.JolivetteK.FredrickL. D.AlbertoP. A. (2018). Increase engagement and achievement with response cards: Science and mathematics inclusion classes. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal16(2), 157–176.
GageN. A.LierheimerK. S.GoranL. G. (2012). Characteristics of students with high-incidence disabilities broadly defined. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 23(3), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207311425385
11.
GreerD.RowlandA. L.SmithS. J. (2014). Critical considerations for teaching students with disabilities in online environments. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46(5), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914528105
12.
HaydonT.MancilG. R.KroegerS. D.McLeskeyJ.LinW. J. L. (2011). A review of the effectiveness of guided notes for students who struggle learning academic content. Preventing School Failure, 55(4), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2010.548415
13.
HaydonT.MarsicanoR.ScottT. M. (2013). A comparison of choral and individual responding: A review of the literature. Preventing School Failure, 57(4), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2012.682184
14.
HaydonT.Musti-RaoS.AlterP. (2017). Comparing choral responding and a choral responding plus mnemonic device during geography lessons for students with mild to moderate disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 40(1), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2017.0005
15.
HewardW. L. (2015). Active student responding. In ScarlettW. G. (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of classroom management: An A-to-Z guide (Vol. 1, pp. 8–11). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346243.n6
16.
HewardW. L.Alber-MorganS. R.KonradM. (2017). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education. Pearson.
17.
HewardW. L.CoursonF. H.NarayanJ. S. (1989). Using choral responding to increase active student response. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 21(3), 72–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005998902100321
18.
KonradM.JosephL. M.EveleighE. (2009). A meta-analytic review of guided notes. Education and Treatment of Children, 32(3), 421–444. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0066
19.
KonradM.JosephL. M.ItoiM. (2011). Using guided notes to enhance instruction for all students. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46(3), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451210378163
20.
KoureaL.KonradM.KazoliaT. (2019). Effects of a guided-notes intervention program on the quiz and note-taking Greek history performance of high school students with learning difficulties in Cyprus. Education and Treatment of Children, 42, 47–72. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2019.0003
21.
LambertM. C.CartledgeG.HewardW. L.LoY. (2006). Effects of response cards on disruptive behavior and academic responding during math lessons by fourth-grade urban students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8(2), 88–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007060080020701
22.
LougheryT.O.BetzA. M.MajdalanyL. M.NicholsonK. (2014). Using instructive feedback to teach category names to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 425–430. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.123
MessengerM.CommonE. A.LaneK. L.OakesW. P.MenziesH. M.CantwellE. D.EnnisR. P. (2017). Increasing opportunities to respond for students with internalizing behaviors: The utility of choral and mixed responding. Behavioral Disorders, 42(4), 170–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742917712968
25.
MüllerkeN.DuchaineE. L.GrünkeM.KarnesJ. (2019). The effects of a response card intervention on the active participation in math lessons of five seventh graders with learning disabilities. Insights into Learning Disabilities, 16(2), 107–120.
26.
NagroS. A.HooksS. D.FraserD. W.CorneliusK. E. (2016). Whole-group response strategies to promote student engagement in inclusive classrooms. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 50(4), 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916640749
27.
OefingerL. M.PeverlyS. T. (2020). The lecture note-taking skills of adolescents with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(3), 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419897268
28.
RandolphJ. J. (2007). Meta-analysis of the research on response cards: Effects on test achievement, quiz achievement, participation, and off-task behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007070090020201
RoweD. A. (2020). Teaching students with disabilities: It is all about the science. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 52(6), 364–366. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0040059920933853
TwymanJ. S.HewardW. L. (2018). How to improve student learning in every classroom now. International Journal of Educational Research, 87, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.05.007
35.
WatsonJ.PapeL.MurinA.GeminB.VashawL. (2015). Keeping pace with K-12 digital learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Evergreen Education Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED558147.pdf
36.
WhitneyT.CooperJ. T.LingoA.S. (2015). Providing student opportunities to respond in reading and mathematics: A look across grade levels. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2014.919138
37.
WoodC. L.MabryL. E.KretlowA. G.LoY.GallowayT. W. (2009). Effects of preprinted response cards on students’ participation and off-task behavior in a rural kindergarten classroom. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 28(2), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687050902800206
