This meta-analysis systematically examines the evidence supporting the effectiveness of performance feedback as an evidence-based practice in the training of preservice special education teachers. A total of 27 studies were evaluated using the rigorous What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) design standards for Single-Case Experimental Research. Results indicate that 15 studies, encompassing 56 preservice special education teachers, met the WWC design standards with and without reservation. The weighted aggregated mean treatment effect estimates were .91 (Tau-U) and 2.59 (Between-Case Standardized Mean Difference), demonstrating a strong impact of performance feedback interventions on enhancing preservice teachers’ instructional practices. This study contributes to the extant literature by providing robust evidence supporting the classification of performance feedback as an evidence-based practice for preservice special education teacher preparation, meeting the stringent criteria set forth by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC). Analyses also include methodological quality, risk of bias, and treatment effect estimates, addressing key gaps in extant literature and supporting recommendations for future research. The findings highlight the potential of performance feedback to shape effective teaching behaviors among preservice special education teachers.
AdamsJ.Hillier-BrownF. C.MooreH. J.LakeA. A.Araujo-SoaresV.WhiteM.SummerbellC. (2016). Searching and synthesising “grey literature” and “grey information” in public health: Critical reflections on three case studies. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0337-y
2.
*AuldR.BelfioreP.ScheelerM. (2010). Increasing pre-service teachers’ use of differential reinforcement: Effects of performance feedback on consequences for student behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-010-9107-4
3.
*BartonE. E.ChenC. I.PribbleL.PomesM.KimY. A. (2013ab). Coaching preservice teachers to teach play skills to children with disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(4), 330–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406413505113
4.
*BartonE. E.FullerE. A.SchnitzA. (2016). The use of email to coach preservice early childhood teachers. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 36(2), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121415612728
5.
BillingsleyG. M.ScheuermannB. K. (2014). Using virtual technology to enhance field experiences for pre-service special education teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406414530413
6.
BrockM. E.CarterE. W. (2017). A meta-analysis of educator training to improve implementation of interventions for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 38(3), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516653477
7.
BrownellM. T.BenedictA. E.LekoM. M.PeytonD.PuaD.Richards-TutorC. (2019). A continuum of pedagogies for preparing teachers to use high-leverage practices. Remedial and Special Education, 40(6), 338–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518824990
8.
ChandR.AlasaV. M.ChitiyoJ.PietrantoniZ. (2022). Preparation of pre-service teachers: Assessment of generation Z students. In KeengweJ. (Ed.), Handbook of research on digital-based assessment and innovative practices in education (pp. 116–130). IGI Global.
9.
ChenM.PustejovskyJ. E.KlingbeilD. A.Van NormanE. R. (2023). Between-case standardized mean differences: Flexible methods for single-case designs. Journal of School Psychology, 98, 16–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2023.02.002
*CoogleC. G.OttleyJ. R.StorieS.RahnN. L.Kurowski-BurtA. (2020). Performance-based feedback to enhance preservice teachers’ practice and preschool children’s expressive communication. Journal of Teacher Education, 71(2), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118803583
12.
*CoogleC. G.RahnN. L.OttleyJ. R. (2015). Pre-service teacher use of communication strategies upon receiving immediate feedback. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 32, 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.03.003
13.
CookB.OdomS. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900201
14.
CorneliusK. E.NagroS. A. (2014). Evaluating the evidence base of performance feedback in preservice special education teacher training. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406414521837
15.
Darling-HammondL.SykesG. (2003). Wanted, a national teacher supply policy for education: The right way to meet the “Highly Qualified Teacher” challenge. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11, Article 33. http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/261
16.
FallonL. M.Collier-MeekM. A.MagginD. M.SanettiL. M.JohnsonA. H. (2015). Is performance feedback for educators an evidence-based practice? A systematic review and evaluation based on single-case research. Exceptional Children, 81(2), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914551738
17.
GageN. A.CookB. G.ReichowB. (2017). Publication bias in special education meta-analyses. Exceptional Children, 83(4), 428–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291769101
18.
GaretM. S.HeppenJ.WaltersK.SmithT.YangR. (2016). Does content-focused teacher professional development work? Findings from three Institute of Education Sciences studies. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20174010/pdf/20174010.pdf
19.
*GarlandD. P. (2022). Individualized clinical coaching with Bug-in-Ear: Enhancing fidelity of implementation of behavior specific praise among novice teachers of students with developmental disabilities in rural classrooms. Journal of Inquiry and Action in Education, 11(1), n1.
20.
HarnB.MelineM. (2021). Developing critical thinking and reflection in teachers within teacher preparation. In MarianoG. J.FiglianoF. J. (Eds.), Research Anthology on Developing Critical Thinking Skills in Students (pp. 232–251). IGI Global.
21.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446 § 118 Stat. 2647.
24.
KazdinA. E. (2010). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
25.
KlingnerJ. K.BoardmanA. G.McMasterK. L. (2013). What does it take to scale up and sustain evidence-based practices?Exceptional Children, 79(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900205
26.
KratochwillT. R.HornerR. H.LevinJ. R.MachalicekW.FerronJ.JohnsonA. (2021). Single-case design standards: An update and proposed upgrades. Journal of School Psychology, 89, 91–105. https://doi.org/105.10.1016/j.jsp.2021.10.006
27.
KratochwillT. R.HornerR. H.LevinJ. R.MachalicekW.FerronJ.JohnsonA. (2023). Single-case intervention research design standards: Additional proposed upgrades and future directions. Journal of School Psychology, 97, 192–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.12.002
28.
KretlowA. G.BartholomewC. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406410371643
29.
MagginD. M.BartonE.ReichowB.LaneK. L.ShogrenK. A. (2022). Commentary on the What Works Clearinghouse Standards and Procedures Handbook (v. 4.1) for the review of single-case research. Remedial and Special Education, 43(6), 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325211051317
30.
MartensB. K.WittJ. C.ElliottS. N.DarveauxD. X. (1985). Teacher judgments concerning the acceptability of school-based interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.16.2.191
31.
*McKinneyT.VasquezE.III. (2014). There’s a bug in your ear! Using technology to increase the accuracy of DTT implementation. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 49(4), 594–600. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24582354?seq=1
32.
*McLeodR. H.KimS.ResuaK. A. (2019). The effects of coaching with video and email feedback on preservice teachers’ use of recommended practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 38(4), 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121418763531
33.
*MillerR. D.UpholdN. (2021). Using content acquisition podcasts to improve preservice teacher use of behavior-specific praise. Teacher Education and Special Education, 44(4), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406421994336
34.
MoeyaertM.Dehghan-ChaleshtoriM. (2023). Evaluating the design and evidence of single-case experimental designs using the What Works Clearinghouse standards. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 17(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2022.2139148
35.
MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G., & Prisma Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6, e1000097. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
36.
*MorganR. L.GustafsonK. J.HudsonP. J.SalzbergC. L. (1992). Peer coaching in a preservice special education program. Teacher Education and Special Education, 15(4), 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840649201500403
37.
*MorganR. L.MenloveR.SalzbergC. L.HudsonP. (1994). Effects of peer coaching on the acquisition of direct instruction skills by low-performing preservice teachers. The Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699402800105
38.
MortensonB. P.WittJ. C. (1998). The use of weekly performance feedback to increase teacher implementation of a pre referral academic intervention. School Psychology Review, 27(4), 613–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1998.12085942
39.
NudelmanG.OttoK. (2020). The development of a new generic risk-of-bias measure for systematic reviews of surveys. Methodology, 16(4), 278–298. https://doi.org/10.5964/meth.4329
40.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.DavisJ. L.SauberS. B. (2011). Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42(2), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006
41.
PustejovskyJ. E.ChenM.KlingbeilD.Van NormanE. (2023, April). Empirical benchmarks for between-case standardized mean differences from single-case multiple baseline designs examining academic interventions [Paper presentation]. Annual Convention of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
42.
PustejovskyJ. E.HedgesL. V.ShadishW. R. (2014). Design-comparable effect sizes in multiple baseline designs: A general modeling framework. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 39(5), 368–393. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614547577
43.
RakapS. (2015). Effect sizes as result interpretation aids in single-subject experimental research: Description and application of four nonoverlap methods. British Journal of Special Education, 42(1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12091
44.
*RakapS. (2017). Impact of coaching on preservice teachers’ use of embedded instruction in inclusive preschool classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116685753
45.
*RakapS.BalikciS. (2023ab). Training preservice teachers to use evidence-based practices: Effects of coaching with performance feedback on teacher and child outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 86, 101755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101755
46.
RakapS.RakapS.EvranD.CigO. (2016). Comparative evaluation of the reliability and validity of three data extraction programs: UnGraph, GraphClick, and DigitizeIt. Computer in Human Behavior, 55, 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.008
47.
ReichowB.BartonE. E.MagginD. M. (2018). Development and applications of the single-case design risk of bias tool for evaluating single-case design research study reports. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 79, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.05.008
48.
RockM. L.SchumackerR. A.GreggM.HowardP. W.GableR. A.ZigmondN. (2014). How are they now? Longer term effects of eCoaching through online bug-in-ear technology. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406414525048
49.
SchaeferJ. M.OttleyJ. R. (2018). Evaluating immediate feedback via bug-in-ear as an evidence-based practice for professional development. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(4), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418766870
50.
ScheelerM. C.McKinnonK.StoutJ. (2012). Effects of immediate feedback delivered via webcam and bug-in-ear technology on preservice teacher performance. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406411401919
51.
ScheelerM. C.RuhlK. L.McAfeeJ. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(4), 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700407
52.
SchlesR. A.RobertsonR. E. (2019). The role of performance feedback and implementation of evidence-based practices for preservice special education teachers and student outcomes: A review of the literature. Teacher Education and Special Education, 42(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417736571
53.
ShepleyC.ZimmermanK. N.AyresK. M. (2020). Estimating the impact of design standards on the rigor of a subset of single-case research. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 32(2), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207320934048
54.
SinclairA. C.GeselS. A.LeJeuneL. M.LemonsC. J. (2020). A review of the evidence for real-time performance feedback to improve instructional practice. The Journal of Special Education, 54(2), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466919878470
55.
StahmerA.RiethS.LeeE.ReisingerE.MandellD.ConnellJ. (2015). Training teachers to use evidence-based practices for autism: Examining procedural implementation fidelity. Psychology in the Schools, 52, 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21815
56.
Van den NoortgateW.OnghenaP. (2024). Harnessing available evidence in single-case experimental studies: The use of multilevel meta-analysis. Psychologica Belgica, 64(1), 166–184. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.1307
57.
Van HoutenR. (1980). Learning through feedback. Human Science Press.
58.
WarrenS. F.FeyM. E.YoderP. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13(1), 70–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrdd.20139
What Works Clearinghouse. (2020). What Works Clearinghouse standards handbook (Version 4.1). U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/handbooks
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
