During the past 30 years, substantial research activity generated a great deal of knowledge about teaching young children with disabilities in classrooms. This research was conducted by a large number of investigators interested in different topics and issues related to development, learning, and—importantly but less frequently—instruction. Retrospectively, our own research endeavors and experiences were guided implicitly and explicitly by five assumptions about how to approach important social issues and problems: (a) draw on findings from other areas of research, (b) use rigorous experimental methods, (c) rely on systematic replications to understand the applicability and limitations of findings, (d) be alert to serendipitous findings and the feedback from others, and (e) attend to trends and shifts in perspectives, but follow the data when drawing suggestions about practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ault, M.J., Wolery, M., Gast, D.L., Doyle, P.M., & Eizenstat, V. (1988). Comparison of response prompting procedures in teaching numeral identification to autistic subjects. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18, 627-636.
2.
Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N.H. (1968). Reinforcer sampling: A technique for increasing the behavior of mental patients. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 13-20.
3.
Baer, D.M., Wolf, M.M., & Risley, T.R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91-97.
4.
Billingsley, F.F., Schwartz, I., & Wolery, M. (1999). Letter to the editor. Infants and Young Children, 11(3), xii-xiii.
5.
Caldwell, N.K., Wolery, M., Werts, M.G., & Caldwell, Y. (1996). Embedding instructive feedback into teacher-student interactions during independent seat work. Journal ofBehavior Education, 6, 459-480.
6.
Charlop-Christy, M.H., & Haymes, L.K. (1996). Using obsessions as reinforcers with and without mild reductive procedures to decrease inappropriate behaviors of children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 26, 527-546.
7.
Charlop-Christy, M.H., & Haymes, L.K. (1998). Using objects of obsession as token reinforcers for children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 28, 189-198.
8.
Chiara, L., Schuster, J.W., Bell, J., & Wolery, M. (1995). Small-group massed-trial and individually distributed-trial instruction with preschoolers. Journal of Early Intervention , 19, 203-217.
9.
Cybriwsky, C.A., & Schuster, J.W. (1990). Using constant time delay procedures to teach multiplication facts. Remedial and Special Education, 11, 54-59.
10.
Cybriwsky, C.A., Wolery, M., & Gast, D.L. (1990). Use of a constant time delay procedure in teaching preschoolers in a group format. Journal of Early Intervention , 14, 99-116.
11.
Doyle, P.M., Gast, D.L., Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., & Farmer, J.A. (1990). Use of constant time delay in small group instruction: A study of observational and incidental learning. The Journal of Special Education, 23, 369-385.
12.
Doyle, P.M., Gast, D.L., Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., & Meyer, S. (1992). Teaching discrete skills to students with moderate mental retardation in small-group instructional arrangements. Exceptionality, 3, 233-253.
13.
Doyle, P.M., Wolery, M., Gast, D.L., Ault, M.J., & Wiley, K. (1990). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching preschoolers with developmental delays. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 11, 1-22.
14.
Edgar, E.B., & Billingsley, F.F. (1974). Believability when N = 1. The Psychological Record, 24, 147-160.
15.
Etzel, B.C., & LeBlanc, J.M. (1979). The simplest treatment alternative: Appropriate instructional control and errorless learning procedures for the difficult-to-teach child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 361-382.
16.
Filla, A., Wolery, M., & Anthony, L. (1999). Promoting children's conversations during play with adult prompts. Journal of Early Intervention, 22, 93-108.
17.
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, 117-128.
18.
Gast, D.L., Collins, B.C., Wolery, M., & Jones, R. (1993). Teaching preschool children with disabilities to respond to the lures of strangers. Exceptional Children , 59, 301-311.
19.
Gast, D.L., & Wolery, M. (1988). Parallel treatments design: A nested single subject design for comparing instructional procedures. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 270-285.
20.
Gast, D.L., Wolery, M., Morris, L.L., Doyle, P.M., & Meyer, S. (1990). Teaching sight word reading in a group instructional arrangement using constant time delay. Exceptionality, 1, 81-96.
21.
Gold, M.W. (1976). Task analysis of a complex assembly task by the retarded blind. Exceptional Children, 43, 78-84.
22.
Griffen, A.K., Wolery, M., & Schuster, J.W. (1992). Triadic instruction of chained food preparation responses: Acquisition and observational learning . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 193- 204.
23.
Hall, M.G., Schuster, J.W., Wolery, M., Gast, D.L., & Doyle, P.M. (1992). Teaching chained skills in a non-school setting using a divided half instructional format. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 2, 257-279.
24.
Holcombe, A., Wolery, M., & Katzenmeyer, J. (1995). Teaching preschoolers to avoid abduction by strangers: Evaluation of maintenance strategies. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 4, 177-191.
25.
Holcombe, A., Wolery, M., & Snyder, E. (1994). Effects of two levels of procedural fidelity with constant time delay on children's learning. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 4, 49-73.
26.
Holcombe, A., Wolery, M., Werts, M.G., & Hrenkevich, P. (1993). Effects of instructive feedback on future learning. Journal of BehavioralEducation , 3, 259-285.
27.
Hughes, M., Schuster, J.W., & Nelson, C.M. (1993). The acquisition of independent dressing skills by students with multiple handicaps. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 5, 233-252
28.
Hung, D.W. (1978). Using self-stimulation as reinforcement for autistic children. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 8, 355-366.
29.
Kleinert, H.L., & Gast, D.L. (1982). Teaching a multiply handicapped adult manual signs using a constant time delay procedure. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6(4), 25-32.
30.
Kohler, F.W., & Strain, P.S. (1999). Maximizing peer-mediated resources in integrated preschool classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education , 19, 92-101.
31.
Nelson, N.W. (1993). Childhood language disorders in context: Infancy though adolescence. New York: Macmillan .
32.
Premack, D. (1962). Reversibility of the reinforcement relation. Science, 136, 255-257.
Repp, A.C., & Deitz, S.M. (1974). Reducing aggressive and self-injurious behavior of institutionalized retarded children through reinforcement of other behavior . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 313-325.
35.
Schuster, J.W., Griffen, A.K., & Wolery, M. (1992). Comparison of the simultaneous prompting and constant time delay procedures in teaching sight words to elementary students with moderate mental retardation. Journal of BehavioralEducation , 2, 305-325.
36.
Schuster, J.W., Morse, T.E., Ault, M.J., Doyle, P.M., Crawford, M.R., & Wolery, M. (1998). Constant time delay with chained tasks: A review of the literature. Education and Treatment of Children, 21, 74-106.
37.
Schuster, J.W., Stevens, K.B., & Doak, P.K. (1990). Using constant time delay to teach word definitions . The Journal of Special Education, 24, 306-318.
38.
Shelton, B., Gast, D.L., Wolery, M., & Winterling, V. (1991). The role of small group instruction in facilitating observational and incidental learning. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 22, 123-133.
39.
Sugai, G.M., & White, W. (1986). The effect of self-stimulation as a reinforcer on the vocational work rates with severely handicapped students. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 16, 459-471.
40.
Tawney, J.W., & Gast, D.L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
41.
Venn, M.L., Wolery, M., Fleming, L.A., DeCesare, L.D., Morris, A., & Sigesmund, M.H. (1993). Effects of teaching preschool peers to use the mand-model procedure during snack activities. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 2(1), 38-46.
42.
Venn, M.L., Wolery, M., & Greco, M. (1996). Effects of every-day and every-other-day instruction . Journal of Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 11, 15-28.
43.
Venn, M.L., Wolery, M., Werts, M.G., Morris, A., DeCesare, L.D., & Cuffs, M.S. (1993). Embedding instruction in art activities to teach preschoolers with disabilities to imitate their peers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8, 277-294.
44.
Werts, M.G., Caldwell, N.K., & Wolery, M. (1996). Peer modeling of response chains: Observational learning by students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 53-66.
45.
Werts, M.G., Wolery, M., Holcombe, A., & Frederick, C. (1993). Effects of instructive feedback related and unrelated to the target behaviors. Exceptionality, 4, 81-95.
46.
Werts, M.G., Wolery, M., Holcombe, A., & Gast, D.L. (1995). Instructive feedback: Review of parameters and effects. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 5, 55-75.
47.
Werts, M.G., Wolery, M., Holcombe, A., Vassilaros, M.A., & Billings, S.S. (1992). Efficacy of transition-based teaching with instructive feedback. Education and Treatment of Children, 15, 320- 334.
48.
Werts, M.G., Wolery, M., Venn, M.L., Demblowski, D., & Doren, H. (1996). Effects of transition-based teaching with instructive feedback on the acquisition of skills by children with and without disabilities . Journal of Educational Research, 90, 75-86.
49.
Wilbers, J.S. (1989). Effects of high and low procedural fidelity in the delay interval of the constant time delay procedure. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
50.
Wolery, M. (1978). Self-stimulatory behavior as a basis for devising reinforcers. American Association for the Education of the Severely/ Profoundly Handicapped Review, 3, 23-29.
51.
Wolery, M. (1994). Implementing instruction for young children with special needs in early childhood classrooms. In M. Wolery & J. S. Wilbers (Eds.), Including children with special needs in early childhood programs (pp. 151-166). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
52.
Wolery, M. (1998) Making it relevant to practice: Is this an issue for researcher accountability? Journal of BehavioralEducation , 8, 145-150.
53.
Wolery, M., Anthony, L., & Heckathorn, J. (1998). Transition-based teaching: Effects on transitions, teachers' behavior, and children's learning. Journal of Early Intervention, 21, 117-131.
54.
Wolery, M., Anthony, L., Snyder, E.D., Werts, M.G., & Katzenmeyer, J. (1997). Training elementary teachers to embed instruction during classroom activities. Education and Treatment of Children, 20, 40-58.
55.
Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., & Doyle, P.M. (1992). Teaching students with moderate and severe disabilities: Use of response prompting strategies. White Plains, NY : Longman.
56.
Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., Gast, D.L., Doyle, P.M., & Griffen, A.K. (1990). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching chained tasks. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 25, 243-257.
57.
Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., Gast, D.L., Doyle, P.M., & Griffen, A.K. (1991). Teaching chained tasks in dyads: Acquisition of target and observational behaviors. The Journal of Special Education, 25, 198-220.
58.
Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., Gast, D.L., Doyle, P.M., & Mills, B.M. (1990). Use of choral and individual spelling attentional responses in teaching sight word reading during small group instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 11(5), 47-58.
59.
Wolery, M., Bailey, D.B., & Sugai, G.M. (1988). Effective teaching: Principles and procedures of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
60.
Wolery, M., Cybriwsky, C.A., Gast, D.L., & Boyle-Gast, K. (1991). Use of constant time delay and attentional responses with adolescents. Exceptional Children , 57, 462∼474.
61.
Wolery, M., Doyle, P.M., Gast, D.L., Ault, M.J., & Simpson, S.L. (1993). Comparison of progressive time delay and transition-based teaching with preschoolers who have developmental delays. Journal of Early Intervention, 17, 160-176.
62.
Wolery, M., Holcombe, A., Cybriwsky, C.A., Doyle, P.M., Schuster, J.W., Ault, M.J., & Gast, D.L. (1992). Constant time delay with discrete responses: A review of effectiveness and demographic, procedural, and methodological parameters . Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 239-266.
63.
Wolery, M., Kirk, K., & Gast, D.L. (1985). Stereotypic behavior as a reinforcer: Effects and side-effects. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 15, 149-161.
64.
Wolery, M., Werts, M.G., Holcombe, A., Billings, S.S., & Vassilaros, M.A. (1993). Instructive Feedback: A comparison of simultaneous and alternating presentation of non-target stimuli. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 3, 187-204.
65.
Wolery, M., Werts, M.G., Snyder, E.D., & Caldwell, N.K. (1994). Efficacy of constant time delay implemented by peer tutors in general education classrooms. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 4, 415-436.
66.
Zhang, J., Horvat, M., & Gast, D.L. (1994). Using constant time delay procedures to teach task-analyzed gross motor skills to individuals with severe intellectual disabilities . Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 11, 347-358.
