Rural special educators face unique challenges in providing high quality special education services, especially when teaching grade-aligned science content. Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is one strategy that has the potential to address two major challenges (i.e., a lack of preservice training and limited professional development opportunities) in providing grade-aligned content instruction with fidelity. This study investigated the use of a CAI intervention package to teach three middle school students with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability the structure and function of five key elements of an amoeba. Results showed a functional relation between the number of correct responses made during probe sessions and introduction of the CAI intervention. Implications for practice and suggestions for future research are also discussed.
AbellM.CollinsB. C.KleinertH.PenningtonR. (2014). Providing support for rural teachers of students with low incidence disabilities who are completing the Kentucky teacher internship program. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33, 14–18. doi:10.1177/875687051403300303
2.
AlbertoP. A.TroutmanA. C. (2012). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Merrill Prentice Hall.
3.
AnohinaA. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 8, 91–102.
4.
BerryA. B.GravelleM. (2013). The benefits and challenges of special education positions in rural settings: Listening to teachers. Rural Educator, 34(2), 1–13.
5.
BerryA. B.PetrinR. A.GravelleM. L.FarmerT. W. (2011). Issues in special education teacher recruitment, retention, and professional development: Considerations in supporting rural teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 30, 3–11. doi:10.1177/875687051103000402
6.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.LoY.-Y.SaundersA. F.RootJ. R.Ley DavisL.BroshC. (2018). Teaching students with moderate intellectual disability to solve word problems. The Journal of Special Education, 51, 225–235. doi:10.1177/0022466917721236
7.
BrownellM. T.BishopA. M.SindelarP. T. (2005). NCLB and the demand for highly qualified teachers: Challenges and solutions for rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24, 9–15. doi:10.1177/875687050502400103
8.
CarterE. W.HughesC. (2006). Including high school students with severe disabilities in general education classes: Perspectives of general and special educators, paraprofessionals, and administrators. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 174–185. doi:10.1177/154079690603100209
9.
CollinsB. C. (Ed.). (2007). Moderate and severe disabilities: A foundational approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
CourtadeG.SpoonerF.BrowderD. M. (2007). Review of studies with students with significant cognitive disabilities which link to science standards. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 32, 43–49. doi:10.2511/rpsd.32.1.43
13.
CowanR. J.AbelL.CandelL. (2017). A meta-analysis of single-case research on behavioral momentum to enhance success in students with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47, 1464–1477. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3076-6
14.
DouglasK. H.WojcikB. W.ThompsonJ. R. (2012). Is there an app for that?Journal of Special Education Technology, 27, 59–70. doi:10.1177/016264341202700206
15.
Fernández-LópezÁ.Rodríguez-FórtizM. J.Rodríguez-AlmendrosM. L.Martínez-SeguraM. J. (2013). Mobile learning technology based on iOS devices to support students with special education needs. Computers & Education, 61, 77–90. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.09.014
16.
GastD. L.LedfordJ. R. (2014). Single-case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Rutledge.
17.
GilliamJ. E. (1995). Gilliam Autism Rating Scale. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
18.
HammondH.IngallsL. (2003). Teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion: Survey results from elementary school teachers in three southwestern rural districts. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 22, 24–30. doi:10.1177/875687050302200204
19.
Hart BarnettJ. E. H.ClearyS. (2015). Review of evidence-based mathematics interventions for students with autism spectrum disorders. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50, 172–185.
20.
HornerR. D.BaerD. M. (1978). Multiple-probe technique: A variation of the multiple baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 189–196.
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, 165–179. doi:10.1177/001440290507100203
22.
HowleyA.WoodL.HoughB. (2011). Rural elementary school teachers’ technology integration. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(9), 1–13.
23.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
24.
JohnsonE. S. (2015). Increasing rural special education teacher candidates’ ability to implement evidence-based practices: A program description of the Boise State University TATERS program. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34, 5–9. doi:10.1177/875687051503400103
25.
KagoharaD. M.van der MeerL.RamdossS.O’ReillyM. F.LancioniG. E.DavisT. N.SigafoosJ. (2013). Using iPods® and iPads® in teaching programs for individuals with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 147–156. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.07.027
26.
KingS. A.LemonsC. J.DavidsonK. A. (2016). Math interventions for students with autism spectrum disorder: A best-evidence synthesis. Exceptional Children, 82, 443–462. doi:10.1177/0014402915625066
27.
KnightV. F.McKissickB. R.SaundersA. (2013). A review of technology-based interventions to teach academic skills to students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 2628–2648. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1814-y
28.
KnightV. F.SartiniE. (2015). A comprehensive literature review of comprehension strategies in core content areas for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 1213–1229. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2280-x
29.
KratochwillT. R.HitchcockJ. H.HornerR. H.LevinJ. R.OdomS. L.RindskopfD. M.ShadishW. R. (2013). Single-case intervention research design standards. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 26–38. doi:10.1177/0741932512452794
30.
LedfordJ. R.WorleyM.GastD. L. (2014). Controversial and critical issues in single case research. In GastD. L.LedfordJ. R. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 377–396). New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
LenzA. S. (2013). Calculating effect size in single-case research: A comparison of non-overlap methods. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 46, 64–73. doi:10.1177/0748175612456401
32.
McKissickB. R. (2015). Computer-assisted instruction. In ScarlettW. G. (Ed.), Classroom management: A-to-Z guide (pp. 171–173). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
McKissickB. R.DiegelmannK. M.ParkerS. (2017). Using technology to address barriers in rural special education for students with autism: A do-it-yourself guide. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36, 155–159. doi:10.1177/8756870517707712
34.
MechlingL. C. (2011). Review of twenty-first century portable electronic devices for persons with moderate intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorders. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 479–498.
35.
MillerB. T.KrockoverG. H.DoughtyT. (2013). Using iPads to teach inquiry science to students with a moderate to severe intellectual disability: A pilot study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 887–911. doi:10.1002/tea.21091
36.
MonkD. H. (2007). Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in rural areas. Future of Children, 17, 155–174. doi:10.1353/foc.2007.0009
37.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.BrownL. (2009). The improvement rate difference for single-case research. Exceptional Children, 75, 135–150. doi:10.1177/001440290907500201
38.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.DavisJ. L. (2011). Effect size in single-case research: A review of nine non-overlap techniques. Behavior Modification, 35, 303–322. doi:10.117/0145445511399147
39.
PenningtonR. C. (2010). Computer-assisted instruction for teaching academic skills to students with autism spectrum disorders: A review of literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 25, 239–248. doi:10.1177/1088357610378291
40.
RootJ. R.StevensonB. S.Ley DavisL.Geddes-HallJ.TestD. W. (2017). Establishing computer-assisted instruction to teach academics to students with autism as an evidence-based practice. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47, 275–284. doi:10.1007/s10803-016-2947-6
41.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.CastoG. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 24–33. doi:10.1177/074193258700800206
42.
SmithB. R.SpoonerF.WoodC. L. (2013). Using embedded computer-assisted explicit instruction to teach science to students with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 433–443. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2012.10.010
43.
SpoonerF.KnightV. F.BrowderD. M.JimenezB.DiBiaseW. (2011). Evaluating evidence-based practice in teaching science content to students with severe developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 36, 62–75. doi:10.2511/rpsd.36.1-2.62
44.
SpoonerF.McKissickB. R.KnightV. F. (2017). Establishing the state of affairs for evidence-based practices in students with severe disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 42, 8–18. doi:10.1177/1540796916684896
WongC.OdomS. L.HumeK. A.CoxA. W.FettigA.KucharczykS.. . . SchultzT. R. (2015). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism spectrum disorder: A comprehensive review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 1951–1966. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z
