Virtual manipulatives are an evidence-based practice in mathematics for students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Yet, to date, most research exploring the effects of the virtual-representational-abstract (VRA) instructional sequence has been conducted in researcher-implemented settings. However, to ensure researchers are able to provide accurate practice recommendations, more research is needed to explore the teacher implementation of this intervention. The purpose of this concurrent multiple probe across participants single-case design study was to examine the effects of a teacher-implemented VRA instructional sequence taught via explicit instruction on the accuracy with which three elementary students with ASD solve addition with regrouping problems. The VRA instructional sequence involved the use of virtual base ten blocks, drawings, and abstract numerical strategies to solve addition with regrouping problems. Researchers found a functional relation between the VRA instructional sequence and student accuracy. All three students were also able to maintain their accuracy after intervention ended. The teacher was able to implement the VRA instructional sequence after only two training sessions with over 97% treatment fidelity.
ArcherA. L.HughesC. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. The Guilford Press.
2.
BassetteL.BouckE. C.ShurrJ.ParkJ.CremeansM.RorkE.MillerK.GeiserS. (2019). A comparison of manipulative use on mathematics efficacy in elementary students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 35(4), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419854504
BouckE. C.SatsangiR.Taber-DoughtyT.CourtneyW. T. (2014). Virtual and concrete manipulatives: A comparison of approaches for solving mathematics problems for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(1), 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1863-2
5.
BouckE. C.SprickJ. (2019). The virtual–representational–abstract framework to support students with disabilities in mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(3), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451218767911
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.LoY-ySaundersA. F.RootJ. R.Ley DavisL.BroshC. R. (2018). Teaching students with moderate intellectual disability to solve word problems. The Journal of Special Education, 51(4), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917721236
8.
CarbonneauK. J.MarleyS. C.SeligJ. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084
9.
CarrollC.PattersonM.WoodS.BoothA.RickJ.BalainS. (2007). A conceptual framework for implementaiton fidelity. Implementation Science, 2(40). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
10.
ConnollyA. J. (2007). KeyMath-3 diagnostic assessment. Pearson.
11.
CookB. G.BuysseV.KlingnerJ.LandrumT. J.McWilliamR. A.TankersleyM.TestD. W. (2014). CEC’s standards for classifying the evidence base of practices in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 36(4), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514557271
12.
DoablerC. T.FienH. (2013). Explicit mathematics instruction: What teachers can do for teaching students with mathematics difficulties?Intervention for School and Clinic, 48(5), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451212473151
13.
GastD. L.SpriggsA. D. (2014). Visual analysis of graphic data. In GastD. L. (Ed.), Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences (pp. 176–210). Routledge.
14.
HughesC. A.MorrisJ. R.TherrienW. J.BensonS. K. (2017). Explicit instruction: Historical and contemporary contexts. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 32(3), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12142
15.
KimS. J.KastbergS. E.XinY. P.LeiQ.LiuB.WeiS.ChenY. (2022). Counting strategies of students struggling in mathematics in a computer-based learning environment. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 68(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.101007
16.
KingS. A.LemonsC. J.DavidsonK. A. (2016). Math interventions for students with autism spectrum disorder: A best evidence synthesis. Exceptional Children, 82(4), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915625066
17.
LedfordJ.GastD. (2018). Single case research methodology. Routledge.
18.
LongH. M. (2023). Mathematics interventions for students with autism: Application to realistic classroom settings [Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University].
19.
LongH. M.BouckE. C.JakubowL. N. (2023). Teaching subtraction to students with ASD online via the VRA instructional sequence. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 58(1), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/215416472305800108
20.
LongH. M.BouckE. C.KellyH. M. (2022). An evidence-based practice synthesis of virtual manipulatives for students with ASD and IDD. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 38(3), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576221121654
21.
MagginD. M.CookB. G.CookL. (2019). Making sense of single-case design effect sizes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(3), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12204
22.
MoranoS.FloresM. M.HintonV.MeyerJ. (2020). A comparison of concrete-representational-abstract and concrete-representational-abstract-integrated fraction interventions for students with disabilities. Exceptionality, 28(2), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2020.1727328
23.
ParkJ.BouckE. C.FisherM. H. (2021). Using the virtual-representational-abstract with overlearning instruction sequence to students with disabilities in mathematics. The Journal of Special Education, 54(4), 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466920912527
24.
ParkJ.BouckE. C.SmithJ. P. (2020). Using a virtual manipulative intervention package to support maintenance in teaching subtraction with regrouping to students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04225-4
25.
PeltierC.MorinK. L.BouckE. C.LingoM. E.PulosJ. M.SchefflerF. A.SukA.MathewsL. A.SinclairT. E.DeardorffM. E. (2019). A meta-analysis of single-case research using mathematics manipulatives with students at risk or identified with a disability. The Journal of Special Education, 54(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466919844516
26.
RootJ. R.BrowderD. M.SaundersA. F.LoY. (2017). Schema-based instruction with concrete and virtual manipulatives to teach problem solving to students with autism. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516643592
27.
RootJ. R.CoxS. K.GilleyD.WadeT. (2021). Using a virtual-representational-abstract integrated framework to teach multiplicative problem solving to middle school students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(7), 2284–2296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04674-2
28.
RootJ. R.CoxS. K.McConomyM. A. (2022). Teacher implemented modified schema-based instruction with middle-grades students with extensive support needs. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 47(91), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969221076147
29.
SatsangiR.MillerB. (2017). The case for adopting virtual manipulatives in mathematics education for students with disabilities. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(4), 303–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1275505
30.
ShurrJ.BouckE. C.BassetteL.ParkJ. (2021). Virtual versus concrete: A comparison of mathematics manipulatives for three elementary students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 36(2), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357620986944
31.
SpriggsA. D.GastD. L.KnightV. F. (2016). Video modeling and observational learning to teach gaming access to students with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 4646(1), 2845–2858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2824-3
32.
StricklandT. K. (2017). Using the CRA-I strategy to develop conceptual and procedural knowledge of quadratic expressions. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(2), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916673353
33.
StricklandT. K.MacciniP. (2013). The effects of the concrete–representational–abstract integration strategy on the ability of students with learning disabilities to multiply linear expressions within area problems. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 142–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932512441712
34.
VannestK. J.ParkerR. I.GonenO.AdiguzelT. (2016). Single case research: Web-based calculator for SCR analysis (Version 2.0) [Web-based application]. Texas A&M University. https://www.singlecaseresearch.org
35.
WhiteO. R.HaringN. G. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Merrill.
36.
WongC.OdomS. L.HumeK. A.CoxA. W.FettigA.KucharczykS.BrockM. E.PlavnikJ. B.FleuryV. P.SchultzT. R. (2015). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism spectrum disorder: A comprehensive review. Jounral of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(1), 1951–1966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z
37.
YakubovaG.HughesE. M.ChenB. B. (2020). Teaching students with ASD to solve fraction computations using a video modeling instructional package. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 101(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103637
