A Comparison of Embedded Total Task Instruction in Teaching Behavioral Chains to Massed One-on-One Instruction for Students With Intellectual Disabilities
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2012
A Comparison of Embedded Total Task Instruction in Teaching Behavioral Chains to Massed One-on-One Instruction for Students With Intellectual Disabilities
This study is a comparison of the embedded instruction of behavioral chains with more traditional (one-on-one massed trials in special education setting) instructional procedures for teaching behavioral chains to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Although embedded instruction has emerged as a promising potential instructional procedure, no literature has examined the efficacy of embedded instructional procedures to teach more complex chained behaviors. To date, all research on embedding instruction in general education settings has focused on teaching discrete skills. This study compares instruction of embedded total task chains with more traditional (one-on-one massed trials in special education setting) instructional procedures for teaching behavioral chains. The chains targeted for instruction were selected by state core educational needs and functional skill development.
BrowderD.SnellM.WildongerB. (1988). Simulation and community-based instruction of vending machines with time delay. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 23, 175-185.
2.
BrowderD.SpoonerF.WakemanS. (2006). Aligning instruction with academic content standards: Finding the link. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 309-321.
3.
ColeC.WaldronN.MajdM. (2004). Academic progress of students across inclusive and traditional settings. Mental Retardation, 42, 136-144.
4.
CollinsB.HagerK.GallowayC. (2011). Addition of functional content during core content instruction with students with moderate disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 22-39.
5.
HarrowerJ. (1999). Educational inclusion of children with severe disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions,1, 215-230
6.
Holcombe-LigonA.WoleryM.GastD. (1994). Comparative single-subject research: Description of designs and discussion of problems. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 14, 119-145. doi:10.1177/02711214940140011110.1177/027112149401400111
7.
HughesT.FredrickL.KeelM. (2002). Learning to effectively implement constant time delay procedures to teach spelling. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 209-222.
8.
JamesonJ.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. (2007). A comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in the special education classroom. Education & Treatment of Children, 30, 23-44. doi:10.1353/etc.2007.000110.1353/etc.2007.0001
9.
JamesonJ.McDonnellJ.PolychronisS.RiesenT. (2008). Embedded, constant time delay instruction by peers without disabilities in general education classrooms. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 346-363. doi:10.1352/2008.46:346-36310.1352/2008.46:346-363
10.
JohnsonJ.McDonnellJ. (2004). An exploratory study of the implementation of embedded instruction by general educators with students with developmental disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 27, 46-63.
11.
McDonnellJ. (1987). The effects of time delay and increasing prompt hierarchy strategies on the acquisition of purchasing skills by students with severe handicaps. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 12, 227-236. Retrieved from ERIC database.
12.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.McQuiveyC. (2008). Embedded instruction for students with developmental disabilities in general education classrooms. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children-DDD.
13.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.PolychronisS.RiesenT.JamesonM.JohnsonJ.KercherK. (2006). Comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in general education classes with small group instruction in special education classes. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 125-138.
14.
McDonnellJ.O’NeillR. (2003). A perspective on single/within subject research methods and “Scientifically Based Research.”Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 28, 138-142.
15.
McDonnellJ.ThorsonN.DisherS. (2003). The achievement of students with developmental disabilities and their peers without disabilities in inclusive settings: An exploratory study. Education & Treatment of Children, 26, 224-236.
16.
MillerU.TestD. (1989). A comparison of constant time delay and most-to-least prompting in teaching laundry skills to students with moderate retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 24, 363-370.
O’NeillR.McDonnellJ.BillingsleyF.JensonW. (2010). Single case research designs in educational and community settings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19.
PolychronisS.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.RiesenT.JamesonM. (2004). A comparison of two trial distribution schedules in embedded instruction. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 140-151.
20.
RiesenT.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W. (2003). A Comparison of Constant Time Delay and Simultaneous Prompting Within Embedded Instruction in General Education Classes with Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities. Journal Of Behavioral Education, 12(4), 241-259.
21.
SchusterJ. W.GastD. L.WoleryM. (1988). The effectiveness of a constant time-delay procedure to teach chained responses to adolescents with mental retardation. Journal Of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21169-178.
22.
SchusterJ.GriffenA. (1990). Using time delay with task analyses. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22, 49-53.
23.
SchusterJ.MorseT.AultM.DoyleP.CrawfordM.WoleryM. (1998). Constant time delay with chained tasks: A review of the literature. Education & Treatment of Children, 21, 74-106.
24.
SpoonerF.DymondS.KennedyC. (2006). Accessing the general curriculum. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 277-337.
25.
SpoonerF.SpoonerD. (1984). A review of chaining techniques: Implications for future research and practice. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19, 114-124.
26.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Digest of education statistics, 2010 (NCES 2011-015). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
27.
WallsR. T.DowlerD. L.HaughtP. A. (1984). Progressive delay and unlimited delay of prompts in forward chaining and whole task training strategies. Education & Training Of The Mentally Retarded, 19276-284.
28.
WoleryM.AnthonyL.CaldwellN. K. (2002). Embedding and distributing constant time delay in circle time and transitions. Topics In Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 14-25.
29.
WechslerD. (1991). The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
