A review of the literature on academic learning in general education settings for students with moderate and severe intellectual disability was conducted. A total of 17 experimental studies was identified and evaluated using quality indicators for single-case design research. Studies that met or met with reservation the criteria established for quality research were used to determine the evidence base of the instructional strategies described in the literature. The review found embedded instruction trials using constant time delay to be an evidence-based practice for teaching academic content to students with moderate and severe intellectual disability in general education. In addition, strategies that were not yet evidence-based but showed promise in the literature for teaching academic content to students with moderate and severe intellectual disability in general education were described. Last, implications for practice and directions for future research were discussed.
AgranM.BlanchardC.WehmeyerM.HughesC. (2002). Increasing the problem-solving skills of students with developmental disabilities participating in general education. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 279–288.
2.
BillingsleyF.WhiteO. R.MunsonR. (1980). Procedural reliability: A rationale and example. Behavioral Assessment, 2, 229–241.
3.
BrowderD. M.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.SpoonerF.MimsP. J.BakerJ. N. (2009). Using time delay to teach picture and word recognition to identify evidence-based practice for students with severe developmental disabilities. Exceptional Children, 75, 343–364.
4.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.HarrisA.WakemanS. (2008). A meta-analysis on teaching mathematics to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, 407–432.
5.
BrowderD. M.TrelaK.CourtadeG. R.JimenezB. A.KnightV.FlowersC. (2012). Teaching mathematics and science standards to students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 46, 26–35.
6.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.AlgozzineB. (2006). Research on reading for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.
7.
CarterE. W.CushingL. S.ClarkN. M.KennedyC. H. (2005). Effects of peer support interventions on student' access to the general curriculum and social interactions. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30, 15–25.
8.
ChardD. J.Ketterlin-GellerL. R.BakerS. K.DoablerC.ApichatabutraC. (2009). Repeated reading interventions for students with learning disabilities: Status of the evidence. Exceptional Children, 75, 263–281.
9.
CollinsB. C.BransonT. A.HallM.RankinS. W. (2001). Teaching secondary students with moderate disabilities in an inclusive academic classroom setting. Journal of Development and Physical Disabilities, 13, 41–59.
10.
CollinsB. C.EvansA.Creech-GallowayC.KarlJ.MillerA. (2007). Comparison of the acquisition and maintenance of teaching functional and core content sight words in special and general education settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 220–233.
11.
CollinsB. C.HallM.BransonT. A.HolderM. (1999). Acquisition of related and unrelated factual information delivered by a teacher within an inclusive setting. Journal of Behavioral Education, 9, 223–237.
12.
CopelandS. R.CosbeyJ. (2008/2009). Making progress in the general curriculum: Rethinking effective instructional strategies. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 33–34, 214–227.
13.
DowningJ. (2008). Including students with severe and multiple disabilities in typical classrooms (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
14.
DowningJ. (2010). Academic instruction for students with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
15.
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, 165–180.
16.
HudsonM. E. (2013). Effects of a peer-delivered system of least prompts intervention package and academic read-alouds on listening comprehension for students with moderate intellectual disability (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (AAT3510205).
17.
HudsonM. E.BrowderD. M.JimenezB. (in press). Effects of a peer-delivered system of least prompts with adapted text read-alouds on listening comprehension for students with moderate intellectual disability. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities.
18.
JacksonL. B.RyndakD. L.WehmeyerM. L. (2008/2009). The dynamic relationship between context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a research based practice. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 33–34, 175–195.
19.
JamesonJ. M.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.RiesenT.PolychronisS. (2007). A comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in the special education classroom. Education & Treatment of Children, 30, 23–44.
20.
JamesonJ. M.McDonnellJ.PolychronisS.RiesenT. (2008). Embedded, constant time delay instruction by peers without disabilities in general education classrooms. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 346–363.
21.
JamesonJ. M.WalkerR.UtleyK.MaughanR. (2012). A comparison of embedded total task instruction in teaching behavior chains to massed one-to-one instruction for students with intellectual disabilities: Accessing general education settings and core academic content. Behavior Modification, 36, 320–340. doi:10.1177/0145445512440574.
22.
JimenezB. A.BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.DiBiaseW. (2012). Inclusive inquiry science using peer-mediated embedded instruction for students with a moderate intellectual disability. Exceptional Children, 78, 301–317.
23.
JohnsonJ. W.McDonnellJ.HolzwarthV. N.HunterK. (2004). The efficacy of embedded instruction for students with developmental disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 214–227.
24.
JorgensenC. M.McSheehanM.SonnenmeierR. M. (2010). The beyond access model. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
25.
LaneK. L.KalbergJ. R.ShepcaroJ. C. (2009). An examination of the evidence base for function-based interventions for students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders attending middle and high schools. Exceptional Children, 75, 321–340.
26.
LeeS. H.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D. (2008). Self-determination and access to the general education curriculum. The Journal of Special Education, 42, 91–107.
27.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.McQuiveyC. (2008). Embedded instruction for students with developmental disabilities in general education classes (Vol. 6). Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
28.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.PolychronisS.RiesenT.JamesonM.KercherK. (2006). Comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in general education classes with small group instruction in special education classes. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 125–138.
29.
McDonnellJ.Mathot-BucknerC.ThorsonN.FisterS. (2001). Supporting the inclusion of students with moderate and severe disabilities in junior high school general education classes: The effects of classwide peer tutoring, multi-element curriculum, and accommodations. Education & Treatment of Children, 24, 141–160.
30.
McDonnellJ.ThorsonN.AllenC.Mathot-BucknerC. (2000). The effects of partner learning during spelling for students with severe disabilities and their peers. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10, 107–121.
31.
MimsP.HudsonM.BrowderD. (2012). Using read alouds of grade-level biographies and systematic prompting to promote comprehension for students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Focus on Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 27, 65–78.
32.
MithaugD. E.WehmeyerM. L.AgranJ.MartinJ. E.PalmerS. (1998). The self-determined learning model of instruction: Engaging students to solve their learning problems. In WehmeyerM. L.SandsD. J. (Eds.), Making it happen: Student involvement in educational planning, decision-making and instruction (pp. 299–328). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks.
33.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org/.
34.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
OdomS. L.BrantlingerE.GerstenR.HornerR. H.ThompsonB.HarrisK. R. (2005). Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practices. Exceptional Children, 71, 137–148.
37.
PalmerS. B.WehmeyerM. L.GipsonK.AgranM. (2004). Promoting access to the general curriculum by teaching self-determination skills. Exceptional Children, 70, 427–439.
38.
PolychronisS. C.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.RiesenT.JamesonM. (2004). A comparison of two trial distribution schedules in embedded instruction. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 140–151.
39.
RiesenT.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.PolychronisS.JamesonM. (2003). A comparison of constant time delay and simultaneous prompting within embedded instruction in general education classes with students with moderate to severe disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 241–259.
40.
SpoonerF.KnightV.BrowderD.JimenezB.DiBiaseW. (2011). Evaluating evidence-based practice in teaching science content to students with severe developmental disabilities. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 36, 62–75.
41.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.BrewerD. M.WoodW. M. (2005). A content and methodological review of self-advocacy intervention studies. Exceptional Children, 72, 101–125.
42.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.RichterS. M.WhiteJ.MazzottiV.WalkerA. R. (2009). Evidence-based practices in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115–128. doi:10.1177/0885728809336859.
43.
TestD. W.RichterS.KnightV.SpoonerF. (2010). A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the social stories literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 26, 49–62.
44.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.AgranM.MithaugD. E.MartinJ. E. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66, 439–453.
45.
WoleryM.AnthonyL.SnyderE. D.WertsM. G.KatzenmeyerJ. (1997). Training elementary teachers to embed instruction during classroom activities. Education & Treatment of Children, 20, 40–58.
46.
WoleryM.WertsM. G.SnyderE. D.CaldwellN. K. (1994). Efficacy of constant time delay implemented by peer tutors in general education classrooms. Journal of Behavioral Education, 4, 415–436.
