This research examined the relative efficacy of general case programming and rule learning in promoting the generalization and maintenance of table setting across different menus. General case programming involved the use of a representative sample of menus drawn from a universe of menus to instruct table setting. Rule learning consisted of the training of discriminations, concepts, and rules that could be applied to any table setting situation. Thirty-six participants with mental retardation were randomly assigned to one of three groups: general case programming, rule learning, or attention control. General case programming and rule learning were successful in promoting generalized table setting. At the maintenance phase, general case and rule training were effective with higher performing participants, whereas only general case programming facilitated maintenance of generalization for lower performing learners. The findings suggest a more prescriptive teaching approach that meets students' individual instructional needs, task demands, and promotes generalized learning over time.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albin, R.W., & Horner, R. H. (1988). Generalization with precision. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 99–120). Baltimore: Brookes.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. $sT 12101 et seq.
4.
Becker, W. C., & Engelmann, S. E. (1978). Systems for basic instruction: Theory and applications. In A. Catania & T. Brigham (Eds.), Handbook of applied behavior analysis: Social and instructional processes (pp. 325–377). New York: Irvington.
5.
Becker, W. C., Engelmann, S., & Thomas, D. (1975). Teaching 2: Cognitive learning and instruction.Chicago: Science Research Associates.
6.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). New York: Academic Press.
7.
Coon, M. E., Vogelsberg, R. I., & Williams, W. (1981). Effects of classroom public transportation instruction on generalization to the natural environment. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6, 46–53.
8.
Corno, L., & Snow, R. E. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 605–629). New York: Macmillan.
9.
Epps, S., Stern, R. J., & Horner, R. H. (1990). Comparison of simulation training on self and using a doll for teaching generalized menstrual care to women with severe mental retardation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 11, (1), 37–66.
10.
Gagné, R. M. (1968). Contributions of learning to human development. Psychological Review, 75, 177–191.
11.
Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning.New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
12.
Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L.J. (1979). Principles of instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
13.
Horner, R. H., & Albin, R. W. (1988). Research on general-case procedures for learners with severe disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 375–388.
14.
Horner, R. H., Jones, D. N., & Williams, J. A. (1985). A functional approach to teaching generalized street crossing. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10, 71–78.
15.
Horner, R. H., Sprague, J., & Wilcox, B. (1982). General case programming for community activities. In B. Wilcox & T. Bellamy (Eds.), Design of high school programs for severely handicapped students (pp. 61–98). Baltimore: Brookes.
16.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. $sT 1400 et seq.
17.
Johnston, J. R. (1988). Generalization: The nature of change. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 19, 314–329.
18.
Judd, C.M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Estimating the effects of social interventions.New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Kazdin, A. E. (1989). Behavior modification in applied settings (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
20.
Lane, D. S., Fletcher, D. N., & Fletcher, H. J. (1983). Improving conditional syllogism performance of young normal and gifted students with discovery and rule instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 441–449.
21.
Marchetti, A. G., McCartney, J. R., Drain, S., Hooper, M., & Dix, J. (1983). Pedestrian skills training for mentally retarded adults: Comparison of training in two settings. Mental Retardation, 21, 107–110.
22.
McDonnell, J. J., Horner, R. H., & Williams, J. A. (1984). A comparison of three strategies for teaching generalized grocery purchasing to high school students with severe handicaps. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 9, 123–134.
23.
Neef, N.A., Iwata, B.A., & Page, T.J. (1978). Public transportation: In vivo versus classroom instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 331–344.
24.
O'Neill, J., Lehman, L., Rice, J., Roberts, C., & Claudio, C. (1986, August). Training generalized table setting via rule learning and general case programming. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
25.
Page, T. J., Iwata, B.A., & Neef, N. A. (1976). Teaching pedestrian skills to retarded persons: Generalization from the classroom to the natural environment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 433–444.
26.
Pancsofar, E. L., & Bates, P. (1985). The impact of the acquisition of successive training exemplars on generalization. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10, 95–104.
27.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. $sT 701 et seq.
28.
Romer, L., Cullinan, T., & Schoenberg, B. (1994). General case training of requesting: A demonstration and analysis. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 57–68.
29.
Sailor, W., Goetz, L., Anderson, J., Hunt, P., & Gee, K. (1988). Research on community intensive instruction as a model for building functional, generalized skills. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 67–98). Baltimore: Brookes.
30.
Snow, R. E. (1977). Learning and individual differences. In L. S. Shulman (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 4). Itasca, IL: F.E. Peacock.
31.
Sprague, J., & Horner, R. H. (1984). An experimental analysis of generalized vending machine use with severely handicapped students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 273–278.
32.
Steere, D., Strauch, J. D., Powell, T. H., & Butterworth, J. (1990). Promoting generalization from a teaching setting to a community-based setting among persons with severe disabilities: A general-case programming approach. Education and Treatment of Children, 13, 5–20.
33.
Terrace, H. S. (1966). Stimulus control. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application (pp. 271–344). New York: Appleton, Century, Crofts.
34.
Voeltz, L. M., & Evans, I. M. (1983). Educational validity: Procedures to evaluate outcomes in programs for severely handicapped learners. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8, 3–15.
35.
Weinberg, S., & Goldberg, K. (1990). Statistics for the behavioral sciences.New York: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Wilcox, B., & Bellamy, G. T. (1982). Design of high school programs for severely handicapped students.Baltimore: Brookes.
37.
Winer, B.J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design.New York: McGraw-Hill.
38.
Zelen, M. (1974). The randomization and stratification of patients to clinical trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 27, 365–375.
