Five preschool students with disabilities received direct instruction on three primary skills: matching shapes, colors, and numbers or letters. This was followed by guided practice using constant time delay under two conditions: computer-assisted instruction (CAI) with interactive software, and teacher-assisted instruction (TAI) with manipulatives. An adapted alternating treatments design was used. Both instructional strategies (CAI and TAI) produced significant gains. CAI was either equal or superior to TAI across skills and participants. The results suggest that CAI, using constant time delay, is an effective means of promoting attainment and maintenance of preacademic skills in young children with disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Guidance Service. (1990). AGS Early Screening Profiles. Circle Pines, MN: Author.
2.
At home with Stickybear [Computer software]. (1997). Hilton Head, SC: Optimum Resources.
3.
Barlow, D.H., & Hayes, S.C. (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 199-210.
4.
Cassatt-James, L.E. (1992). Technology in the classroom: Applications and strategies for the education of children with severe disabilities (pp. 57-66). Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 384 146)
5.
Chen, S.H.A., & Bernard-Opitz, V. (1993). Comparison of personal and computer-assisted instruction for children with autism. Mental Retardation, 31, 368-376.
6.
Claris Works 4.0 [Computer software]. (1996). Santa Clara, CA: Claris Corporation.
7.
Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media . Review of Educational Research, 53, 445-459.
8.
Clements, D.H. (1987). Computers and young children: A review of research . Young Children, 42, 34-44.
9.
Cook, R.E., Tessier, A., & Klein, M.D. (2000). Adapting early childhood curricula for children in inclusive settings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
10.
Cybriwsky, C.A., & Schuster, J.W. (1990). Using constant time delay procedures to teach multiplication facts. Remedial and Special Education, 11, 54-59.
11.
Edwards, B.J., Blackhurst, A.E., & Koorland, M.A. (1995). Computer-assisted constant time delay prompting to teach abbreviation spelling to adolescents with mild learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology , 12, 301-311.
12.
Elliot, A., & Hall, N. (1985). Computers in the preschool: Enhancing curriculum goals. In AECA, Early childhood: Ideals and realities, 2, Brisbane: AECA.
13.
ERIC Digests. (1996, July). Handicapped children are defined by the Act ..., Handicapping condition, number and percentage [Electronic data file]. (1998). Template at: http://www.ed.gov/Architext/AT-ERIC_Digestsearch
14.
Fazio, B.B., & Reith, H.J. (1986). Characteristics of preschool handicapped children's microcoputer use during free-choice periods. Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 10, 247-254.
15.
Fletcher-Flinn, C.M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Computing Research, 12, 219-242.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act, Pub. L. No. 103-227, 108 Stat. 125 (1994).
18.
Halle, J.W., Baer, D., & Spradlin, J.E. (1981). Teacher's generalized use of delay as a stimulus control procedure to increase language use in handicapped children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 389-411.
19.
Hawaii State Department of Education. (1993 ). Program standards and guidelines for special education and special services in Hawaii. Office of Instructional Services /Community and Special Education Branch (RS93-3664).
20.
Hess, R.D., & McGarvey, L.J. (1987). School-relevant effects of educational uses of microcomputers in kindergarten classrooms and homes . Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 269-287.
21.
Hofmeister, A. (1984). Special education in the information age. Peabody Journal of Education, 62, 5-22.
22.
Hungate, H. (1982, January). Computers in the kindergarten. The Computing Teacher, 5-18.
23.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. and amendments.
24.
Intellikeys [Computer keyboard]. (1992). Novato, CA: IntelliTools, Inc.
25.
Intellipics 2.1 [Computer software]. (1993). Novato, CA: IntelliTools, Inc.
26.
Kaiser, A.P., Yoder, P.J., & Keetz, A. (1992). Evaluating milieu teaching. In S. F. Warren & J. Reichle (Eds.), Causes and effects in communication and language intervention (pp. 9-47). Baltimore: Brookes.
27.
Kazdin, A.E. (1982). Interobserver agreement. In Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings (pp. 48-56). New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
Kinsley, T.C., & Langone, J. (1995). Applications of technology for infants, toddlers and preschoolers with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 312-324.
29.
Lahm, E. (1996). Software that engages young children with disabilities: A study of design features. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 11, 115-124.
30.
Lerner, J.W., Lowenthal, B., & Egan, R. (1998). Preschool children with special needs: Children at risk, children with disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
31.
McCarthy, R. (1994, May-June). All together now. Instructor , 19.
32.
McCormick, L. (1987). Comparison of the effects of a microcomputer activity and toy play on social and communication behaviors of young children. Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 11, 195-205.
33.
Munson Doyle, P., 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.
34.
Noonan, M.J., & McCormick, L. (1993). Early intervention in natural environments. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
35.
Okolo, C., Bahr, C., & Reith, H. (1993). A retrospective of computer-based instruction . Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 1-27.
36.
Schery, T., & Spaw, L. (1993, December). Computer talk: Helping young handicapped children communicate. Paper presented at the Council for Exceptional Children, Division for Early Childhood Conference, San Diego, CA.
37.
Schmidt, M., Weinstein, T., Niemic, R., & Walberg, H.J. (1985-1986). Computer-assisted instruction with exceptional children. Journal of Special Education, 19, 497-509.
38.
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, 169-178.
39.
Schuster, J.W., & Griffin, A.K. (1991). Using constant time delay to teach recipe following skills. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26, 411-419.
40.
Semel, E., & Wiig, E.H. (1991). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals—preschool . San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
41.
Sindelar, P.T., Rosenberg, M.S., & Wilson, R.J. (1985). Adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research. Education and Treatment of Children, 8, 67-76.
42.
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, 3-14.
43.
Sparrow, S.S., Balla, D.A., & Cicchetti, O.V. (1984). Vineland adaptive behavior scales-Interview edition. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
44.
Spencer, M., & Baskin, L. (1997). Microcomputers and young children. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327295 83)
45.
Stevens, K.B., Blackhurst, A.E., & Slaton, D.B. (1991). Teaching memorized spelling with a microcomputer: Time delay and computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 153-160.
Stokes, T.F., & Baer, D.M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 347-367.
48.
The Technology Literacy Challenge Fund. (1997 , Summer). Technology and Learning, 17 [special issue]. http://www.ed.gov/Technology/TLCF
49.
Trifiletti, J., Firth, G., & Armstrong, S. (1984). Microcomputers versus resource rooms for LD students: A preliminary investigation of the effects on math skills. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11, 125-132.
50.
Walker, S.L., Elliot, A., & deLacey, P.R. (1994). Enhancing language development for young children at risk: The role of computer-based and direct-instruction teaching. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 19, 40-48.
51.
Watson, J.A., Nida, R.E., & Shade, D.D. (1986). Educational issues concerning young children and microcomputers: Lego with Logo?Early Child Development and Care, 23, 299-316.
52.
Westling, D.L., & Fox, L. (1995). Persons with severe disabilities: Definitions, descriptions, characteristics and potential; and teaching students to acquire new skills. In Teaching students with severe disabilities (pp. 12-14, 151-153). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
53.
Williams, A. (1986). A rationale for the use of microcomputers in special education. The AustralianJournal of Special Education, 10, 36-43.
54.
Wilson, R., Majsterek, D., & Simmons, D. (1996). The effects of computer-assisted versus teacher-directed instruction on the multiplication performance of elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 382-390.
55.
Woodward, J., & Reith, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67, 503-536.
56.
Zimmerman, I.L., Steiner, V.G., & Pond, R.G. (1992). Preschool language scale-Third edition. San Diego, CA: Psychological Corp.
