A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted for articles published between 1985 and May 2009 to (a) examine the degree to which science content was taught to students with severe developmental disabilities and (b) and evaluate instructional procedures in science as evidence-based practices. The review was organized by a conceptual model developed for science content. Seventeen experiments were analyzed for research quality where science content was taught to this population; 14 of these studies were viewed to be of high or adequate quality. In general, we found systematic instruction as an overarching instructional package to be an evidence-based practice for teaching science content. Furthermore, components of systematic instruction (i.e., task analytic instruction and time delay) were analyzed. We discuss the outcomes to reflect how to teach science, what science content to teach, why to teach science, and recommendations for future research and practice.
AgranM.BlanchardC.WehmeyerM. L. (2000). Promoting transition goals and self-determination through student self-directed learning: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 351–364.
2.
AgranM.CavinM.WehmeyerM.PalmerS. (2006). Participation of students with moderate to severe disabilities in the general curriculum: The effects of the self-determined learning model of instruction. Research and Practice for Person with Severe Disabilities, 31, 230–241.
3.
BannermanD. J.SheldonJ. B.ShermanJ. A.HarchikA. E. (1990). Balancing the right to habilitation with the right to personal liberties: The rights of people with developmental disabilities to eat too many doughnuts and take a nap. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 79–89.
4.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 197–207.
5.
BrowderD. M.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.SpoonerF.MimsP. J.BakerJ. N. (2009). Using time delay to teach literacy to students with severe developmental disabilities. Exceptional Children, 75, 343–364.
6.
BrowderD. M.ShearS. M. (1996). Interspersal of known items in a treatment package to teach sight words to students with behavior disorders. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 400–413.
7.
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.
8.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.AlgozzineB. (2006). Research on reading for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.
9.
BrownF. (1991). Creative daily scheduling: A noninstrusive approach to challenging behavior in community residences. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 23, 17–26.
10.
BrownF.LehrD. (1993). Making activities meaningful for students with severe multiple disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 25, 12–16.
11.
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.
12.
CollinsB. C. (2007). Moderate and severe disabilities: A foundational approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
13.
CollinsB. C.EvansA.Creech-GallowayC.KarlJ.MillerA. (2007). Comparison of the acquisition and maintenance of the teaching functional and core content sight words in special and general education settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 220–233.
14.
CollinsB. C.GriffenK. A. (1996). Teaching students with moderate disabilities to make safe responses to product warning labels. Education & Treatment of Children, 19, 30–45.
15.
CollinsB. C.StinsonD. M. (1995). Teaching generalized reading of product warning labels to adolescents with mental disabilities through the use of key words. Exceptionality, 5, 163–181.
16.
CookB. G.TankersleyM.LandrumT. J. (2009). Determining evidence-based practices in special education. Exceptional Children, 75, 365–383.
17.
Cooper-DuffyK.PerlmutterD. G. (2006). Developing math and science skills in general education contexts. In BrowderD. M.SpoonerF. (Eds.), Teaching language arts, math, & science to students with significant cognitive disabilities (pp. 245–276). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
18.
CourtadeG. R.BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.DiBiaseW. (2010). Training teachers to use an inquiry-based task analysis to teach science to students with moderate and severe disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 378–399.
19.
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.
20.
FlickL. B.LedermanN. G., (Eds.) (2004). Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publications.
21.
GastD. L.WinterlingV.WoleryM.FarmerJ. A. (1992). Teaching first-aid skills to students with moderate handicaps in small group instruction. Education & Treatment of Children, 15, 101–124.
22.
GerstenR.FuchsL.ComptonD.CoyneM.GreenwoodC.InnocentiM. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149–164.
23.
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.
24.
JamesonJ. M.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.RiesenT.PolychronisS. (2007). A comparision 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.
25.
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.
26.
JimenezB. A.BrowderD. M.CourtadeG. R. (2009). An exploratory study of self-directed science concept learning by students with moderate intellectual disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 34, 33–46.
27.
LaneK. L.KalbergJ. R.ShepcardJ. C. (2009). An examination of the evidence base for functional-based interventions for students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders attending middle and high schools. Exceptional Children, 75, 321–340.
28.
Marchand-MartellaN. E.MartellaR. C.ChristensenA. M.AgranM.YoungK. R. (1992). Teaching a first-aid skill to students with disabilities using two training programs. Education & Treatment of Children, 15, 15–31.
29.
MatthewsM. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
30.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.PolychronisS.RiesenT.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.
31.
McDonnellJ. J.O'NeillR. (2003). A perspective on single/within subject research methods and “scientifically based research.”Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28, 138–142.
32.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat.1425 (2002).
35.
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.
36.
PalincsarA. S.CollinsK.MaronoN.MagnussonS. J. (2000). Investigating the engagement and learning of students with learning disabilities in guided inquiry science teaching. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 31, 240–251.
37.
PalincsarA. S.MagnussonS. J.CollinsK. M.CutterJ. (2001). Making science accessible to all: Results of a design experiment in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 24, 15–32.
38.
RiesenT.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.PolychronisS.JamesonM. (2003). A comparison of time delay and simultaneous prompting within embedded instruction in general education classes with students with moderate to severe disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 241–260.
39.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (1995). Science and students with mental retardation: An analysis of curriculum features and learner characteristics. Science Education, 79, 251–271.
40.
Siegel-CauseyE.McMorrisC.McGowenS.Sands-BussS. (1998). In junior high you take earth science: Including a student with severe disabilities into an academic class. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 31, 66–72.
41.
SnellM. E., (Ed.) (1983). Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
42.
SnellM. E.BrownF., (Eds.) (2006). Instruction of students with severe disabilities (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
43.
SpoonerF.BrowderD. M. (2003). Scientifically based research in education and students with low incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28, 117–125.
44.
SpoonerF.DiBiaseW.Courtade-LittleG. (2006). Science standards and finding the links. In BrowderD. M.SpoonerF. (Eds.), Teaching language arts, math, & science to students with significant cognitive disabilities (pp. 229–244). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
45.
SpoonerF.StemB.TestD. W. (1989). Teaching first aid skills to adolescents who are moderately mentally handicapped. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 24, 341–351.
46.
SPSS, Inc. (2004). SPSS for Windows (Rel.13.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: Author.
47.
StokesT. F.BaerD. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.
48.
TaberT. A.AlbertoP. A.HughesM.SeltzerA. (2002). A strategy for students with moderate disabilities when lost in the community. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27, 141–152.
49.
TaberT. A.AlbertoP. A.SeltzerA.HughesM. (2003). Obtaining assistance when lost in the community using cell phones. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28, 105–116.
50.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.RichterS. M.WhiteJ.MazzottiV.WalkerA. R. (2009). Evidence-based practice in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115–128. doi: 10.1177/0885728809336859.
51.
TestD. W.RichterS.KnightV.SpoonerF. (2010). A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the social stories literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/1088357609351573.
52.
TobinK. G., (Ed.) (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.
53.
UtleyC. A.ReddyS. S.DelquadriJ. C.GreenwoodC. R.MortweetS. L.BowmanV. (2001). Classwide peer tutoring: An effective teaching procedure for facilitating the acquisition of health education and safety facts with students with developmental disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 24, 1–27.
54.
WatsonM.BainA.HoughtonS. (1992). A preliminary study in teaching self-protective skills to children with moderate and severe mental retardation. The Journal of Special Education, 26, 181–194.
55.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.AgranM.MithaugD.MartinJ. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66, 439–453.
56.
WehmeyerM. L.SchwartzM. (1997). Self-determination and positive adult outcomes: A follow-up study of youth with mental retardation or learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63, 245–255.
57.
WestlingD. L.FoxL. (2009). Teaching students with severe disabilities (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
58.
WinterlingV.GastD. L.WoleryM.FarmerJ. A. (1992). Teaching safety skills to high school students with moderate disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 217–227.
59.
WoleryM.BaileyD. B.SugaiG. M. (1988). Effective teaching: Principles and procedure of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
