An overview and research summary of peer-delivered corrective reading instruction.

Although behavior analysts are trained in discrete trial instruction, other instructional approaches like Direct Instruction are underutilized in behavior analytic practice. Direct Instruction is a specialized technology that capitalizes on sophisticated instructional design and highly effective delivery strategies. What makes Direct Instruction so powerful is that it emphasizes the development of generative repertoires and establishes them efficiently. The purpose of this article is to introduce 10 critical instructional design efforts that behavior analysts can use in their practice, regardless of the population they serve and repertoires they build. The 10 instructional design efforts are summarized in a Direct Instruction Planning Guide. Behavior analysts can follow this sequence of design efforts and refer to the guiding questions as they develop efficient instruction for their learners. In doing so, behavior analysts can take up the torch of Direct Instruction, extend this remarkable instructional approach into their research and practice, and strengthen the behavioral technology available to behavior analytic practitioners.

Recently there has been an increased interest in Skinner's (1957) Verbal Behavior, most notably among parents of with seeking to reverse and correct devastation of condition. The current commentary suggests that with of Skinner's analysis and subsequent application in clinical treatment that analyst's have a responsibility to properly educate community about history of analysis of verbal and to adequately train people who conduct protocols using Skinner's analysis or suffer lessons of past. ********** Recently there has been an increased interest in Skinner's 1957 Verbal Behavior. This is a long awaited change among those of us who have studied Skinner's work and have long believed in validity of his analysis. Much of new interest in this body of work has come about due to application of Skinner's analysis by Sundberg and Partington with who have autism. This work is outlined in 1998 book Teaching Language to Children With Autism or Other Developmental Disabilities and formalized through publication of their assessment manual The ABLLS Protocol (Partington & Sundberg, 1998). This protocol in hands of someone familiar with functional analysis of verbal is a powerful tool not only in assessing deficits and strengths in verbal behavior, but in creating an intervention program for with deficit verbal repertoires. Note that I have not specifically stated children with autism because truth be known when assessment is used appropriately with with other developmental disabilities it is just as powerful in assisting to determine deficit repertoires. Although, sudden given rise to Skinner's analysis is due mainly to it's application in community, it seems important to remember that this is indeed verbal behavior. The analysis applies to all organisms when learning to become members of their verbal community and operants are apparent in every verbal community. Perhaps most important statement that must be made at this point is that along with this rise in popularity among analysts comes a large responsibility. The most important thing that Behavior Analysts could do for analysis, and more focally analysis of verbal is to properly educate people about history of analysis, basic and applied taking this opportunity to promote our science, and not just businesses. Behavior Analysts should not commit same sins that linguist, psychodynamic researchers and clinicians of past have committed. In an article by John Eshelman and Ernest Vargas (1988) pair speaks of promoting behaviorological analysis of verbal behavior. They note several issues of commission and omission that they account for general malaise surrounding radical behaviorist analysis of verbal behavior. Do we not commit same wrong when we allow public, for whatever reason, to call analysis of verbal the new method of ABA or to say that discrete trial training, direct instruction, precision teaching and milieu language training doesn't take into account analysis of verbal behavior a few comments I recently read on an parent internet list for with disabilities. Additionally again and again I have heard of clinicians in field and their new approach to verbal behavior. In meantime I see little about history of analysis or current work in this area of behavior. This does little justice to work of Vargas, Michael, Catania, Sidmund, Sundberg and countless less famous, but equally capable others who have contributed to our knowledge in analysis of verbal behavior. It seems to me to be no different when current analysts omit history upon which they base their current work to public and omission that Eshelman and Vargas speak about. …

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of personalized system of instruction used in the physical fitness unit of online secondary school physical education and sports lesson on academic learning time. The sample of the study was composed of a total of 31 6th graders who attended physical education lesson (experiment group: 15, control group: 16). In the study, data regarding academic learning time were retrieved by using “Academic Learning Time-Physical Education Systematic Observation Tool” which was developed by Parker (1989). Academic learning time was examined over two basic domains including context level and learner involvement level. Lessons were carried out online simultaneously by using personalized system of instruction in the experiment group and direct instruction in the control group. The study findings have shown that personalized system of instruction increases academic learning time significantly compared to direct instruction. While academic learning time was found as 41.99% in the lessons carried out by personalized system of instruction, it was found as 23.93% in the lessons taught by direct instruction. In conclusion, it can be stated that students show appropriate physical activity behavior in 41.99% of their total academic time throughout personalized system of instruction and in 23.93% of their total academic time with direct instruction.

The preparation of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis Reprint Series: Behavior Analysis in Education (1988) provided an opportunity to survey and analyze trends in the field, as reflected by publications in the journal. Apparently, the large volume of behavior-analytic papers on educational topics has been declining and its contents undergoing some interesting but not uniformly welcome shifts. Although the intense concern with classroom conduct has diminished somewhat, that topic continues to be heavily emphasized. Simultaneously, reports of social skills and language studies have accelerated, but analyses of academic performance have progressively declined. Explanations for the findings remain speculative, but behavior analysts are encouraged to address these areas of essential social need.

This special issue of the Journal of Negro Education examines how the current School Reform Movement is meeting and failing to meet the educational needs of African American youth. Such an examination is necessary, we believe, because as a national phenomenon that importantly shapes the lives of Black children, the School Reform Movement itself is being shaped by networks of predominately White business, legislative, and educational elites. And while it is true that, under this leadership, schools now seem to be focusing more on instruction than they did in the past, the instructional frameworks they employ are often incompatible with Black cultural and pedagogical traditions, as several articles in this issue will illuminate. As one consequence of this fact, the academic performance of African American students continues to lag behind that of their White counterparts, at least by the measure of standardized tests, which seems the only measure the school reform oligarchy truly accepts. Let us leave aside for the moment the limitations and biases inherent in standardized tests, and also their utility for stigmatizing disadvantaged populations to better justify the inequities visited upon them. Beyond these considerations, high-stakes testing functions as an integral component of the de-personalized, technocratic school reform paradigm. Other elements of this paradigm include the imposition of so-called tough curriculum standards, more attention to student assessment data than to pedagogy or to students themselves, and various forms of punishment (e.g., grade retention, diploma denial) against students who fail to perform satisfactorily on state examinations. In this educational climate, the principle of equity receives little more than rhetorical attention. Consider, as an example, the matter of teacher quality. If it is only fair to judge students by the same performance standards, is there not also the strongest obligation to provide them with equal opportunities to meet those standards? Indeed, given the critical connection, which Linda Darling-Hammond discusses in this volume, between teacher quality and how well students learn, would not true fairness require that students at educational risk be taught by the most qualified, rather than the least qualified teachers-- the latter comprising a disproportionately high percentage of the teaching forces in most urban areas? To our knowledge, the question of teacher equity across diverse socioeconomic populations is not even a serious item on the school reform agenda. Therefore, while we support the increased attention schools now seem to be giving to instruction, as African American educators, the editors of this issue find the current approach to school reform seriously flawed in at least two respects. First, it has failed either to address, or, in some cases, to even recognize serious inequities in the distribution of both material and human resources among diverse student populations. As a result, students in greatest educational need (especially urban students of color) are being condemned to the same fatal educational disadvantages to which they have been subjected for as long as we can remember. Secondly, the school reform movement has imposed a technocratic, de-personalized, and unnecessarily punitive instructional framework on the process of education, thus suppressing the humane and relational approaches to learning that are traditional within the African American educational, cultural, and social experience. It is this tradition of humane and relational educational approaches that emerges as the central theme of the articles contained in these pages. Within that tradition, educational processes, whatever they happen to be, rest upon deeper, more fundamental, human principles. These include confidence, trust, a sense of community, and high expectations for success among teachers, both for their students as learners and of themselves as nurturers of the priceless human potential they perceive in their students. …

Other articles in this special issue describe state-of-the-art measurement and instructional methodologies that use the tools of precision teaching and specific strategies that have evolved in its application with particular learner populations. The present author has participated in this work from the early 1970's and can cite examples of successful using these methods with learners that span the range from students suffering from severe developmental disabilities in now-defunct institutions to 21st century corporate training with senior sales executives and customer service personnel. Rather than focusing on one or more populations, or on the specific instructional strategies associated with them, the purpose of this article is two-fold: 1) to describe a framework originally articulated in the 1970's for the evolution of precision teaching and fluency-based instruction (Binder, 1978, 1993) that provides a larger context for understanding other contributions in this field, and 2) to illustrate the elements of that framework with examples of measurement and instructional strategies from a range of different populations. Particularly at this time, when many of our colleagues in behavior analysis have not made contact with the work that led to precision teaching, or with early publications that emerged from that work, it seems worthwhile to establish a broader understanding of what precision teaching and its derivatives have brought to our field, and why. A Framework for Evolving Instructional Technology In the late 1960's and early 1970's, precision teaching involved a small and vibrant community of dedicated Skinnerian behavior analysts, led by Ogden Lindsley, Eric Haughton, and a handful of their colleagues and students. Lindsley (1964,1972) was committed to bringing the power of Skinner's method of free operant conditioning into the field of education, and this commitment drove the research and development of the time. It was the most pristine translation among behavioral educators and applied behavior analysts of Skinner's methodology and discoveries into education because it preserved without compromise Skinner's sensitive measure of behavior (response strength), rate of response or behavior frequency As the impact of measuring response rates in instructional procedures with freely emitted behavior became clear (Lindsley, 1992), precision | teachers saw that discrete trial procedures coupled with percentage correct evaluation had the effect of leaving behind what Skinner (Evans, 1968) and others considered to be his most important contribution. With under the influence of Eric Haughton, who referred to blocks of various kinds that prevent acceleration of learned behavior, Binder (1978) framed the evolution of instructional methods in precision teaching as a process of removing that obstruct the acceleration of behavior toward useful levels of performance supported by natural contingencies. Four Kinds of Ceilings that Prevent Growth of Skill The four ceilings originally named during the 1970's offer a framework for understanding how using response rate measures in instructional settings led to development of a new technology of teaching. The ceilings are: 1. Measurement-defined ceilings 2. Procedure-imposed ceilings (also called Teacher-imposed ceilings) 3. Deficit-imposed ceilings 4. Handicap-defined ceilings As Binder and his colleagues working in B.H. Barrett's laboratory classroom (Barrett, 1977) removed each ceiling, the next ceiling appeared as a flat data line on standard celeration charts above which students' performance would not accelerate. As each ceiling appeared, the need for changes in materials, procedures and behavior pinpoints become clear. The remainder of this section describes each ceiling with examples from different populations to illustrate underlying principles that drove the evolution of more effective and efficient performance development strategies. …

IntroductionCourse management systems (CMSs) are systems that provide facilities for teachers and students to engage in teaching and learning activities online by helping to manage various functions like course content preparation and delivery, communication, assessment, administrative functions and collaboration (Ellis, 2001; Nichani, 2001). Other terms have also been used to describe CMSs: online learning environment, virtual learning environment and course-in-a-box (Collis & De Boer 2004). A review of the list of CMSs available at www.edutools.info shows that CMSs are designed with various levels of functionalities but the primary role remains to facilitate interactions between teachers and students.No matter what they are called, CMSs are increasingly used by institutions of higher learning around the world (Sausner, 2005), so much so that they are the 'face' of e-learning for many in these institutions. CMSs are built both by business entities, which charge for their products, and under open source initiatives, which normally provide the products for free. But how much learning is there in these products? Hubscher and Frizell (2002) argue that CMSs provide little or no support for the effective design of web-based instruction.It is tempting to point to the fact that these products are only tools to help teachers and it is up to them to make effective use of these tools. This is the line of argument used by Carmean and Haefner (2002): CMS[s] do not provide a pedagogical platform any more than chalk, chairs, and tables provide the classroom learning experience.. This kind of argument sadly misses the important and obvious fact: CMSs are very different from chairs and tables. They are an environment for learning, normally embedded within a larger environment - the web - which itself offers much potential for teachers and learners. If we are to stick with the analogy of chairs, it would make sense to ask what if the builder of the chairs did not take into account how people sit, but only the materials and the builder's carpentry skills. Do we go ahead and tell the users (teachers and students) that it does not matter how the chair is designed as long as you learn how to sit on it? Such an argument would be a boon for commercial CMS developers because, as long as they can come up with new features and 'improvements' without taking into account how people learn (even when the point of their products is learning), business is assured. On the bright side, there are open source CMSs like Moodle which claim to be grounded in social constructivism.This paper argues that learning should be central to the design of a CMS, although various requirements from teachers, institutions and students themselves would mean that there would be other factors to take into account when designing a CMS. The paper suggests design features that could be incorporated into a CMS based on the three major theories of learning: behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism. It does so in a concrete manner, keeping in mind what is already possible with technology today. This is more useful in the long run than presenting the features in abstract terms that do not help with the implementation of such features. This paper represents an initial part of a PhD project that aims to create a learning-driven CMS specifically for language learning and teaching.BehaviourismMuch maligned, often misunderstood and simplified in a postmodernist world, behaviourism nevertheless remains influential in educational practices (Burton, Moore & Magliaro, 1996; Kozloff, 1998; Smith-Gratto, 2000). Various models of instruction have their roots in behaviourism such as the Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), Mastery Learning, Direct Instruction and other 'explicit teaching' models and practices (Rosenshine, 1986).Early computer-assisted instruction programs are heavily influenced by behaviourist practices, not surprisingly since they appear during a period dominated by behaviourism. …

Developed by Siegfried (“Zig”) Engelmann and colleagues, direct instruction (DI) has been recognized as an effective and replicable teaching model for decades. Although rooted in many principles of learning that behavior analysts utilize in daily practice, DI is not a common a component of behavior analytic services for learners with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This may be attributed to behavior analysts’ unfamiliarity with research evaluating the efficacy of DI with learners with ASD. This article synthesizes findings across studies evaluating DI with learners with ASD. The review addresses the contributions of the studies to date and identifies additional areas of research that may lead to more learners with ASD benefitting from DI.

A modified form of taxonomy from the cognitive shows promise as a way to behaviorally define and develop higher-order thinking in college level courses taught using computer-aided personalized system of instruction (CAPSI). In system, levels of material mastery are assessed behaviorally at the knowledge (or rote memorization), comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels. Here we explore their usefulness in specifying educational objectives for CAPSI courses. Research currently in progress focuses on moving students from the lower to the higher levels in our CAPSI-taught courses at the University of Manitoba. ********** The prescription for teaching a course using the personalized system of instruction (PSI) developed by Keller (1968) is straightforward, and follows the behaviorist formula: First define the behavior you want to teach; then arrange the contingencies that will establish, reinforce, and maintain that behavior. In PSI, the behavior you want to teach is defined by study questions on the course material. The contingencies are specified by the units the material is divided into, the way in which the learner's answers to the questions are evaluated, and the reinforcement that is provided for correct answers to the questions. Various ways of arranging the contingencies have been described in great detail, and validated in numerous experiments in which variables are manipulated (Born, Gledhill & Davis, 1972; Brooke & Ruthven, 1984; Buerkel-Rothfuss, Grey & Yerby, 1993; Caldwell, Bissonnettee, Klishis, Ripley, Farudi, Hochstetter, & Radiker, 1978; Glick, Moore, Roberts & Born, 1982; see Kulik, Kulik, & Bangert-Drowns [1990] for a meta-analysis showing the effectiveness of PSI.) In contrast, there is very little information on how to specify the educational objectives in a PSI-taught course. A modified form of taxonomy (Bloom, 1956; Crone-Todd, Pear, & Read, 2000; Pear, Crone-Todd, Wirth, & Simister, in press) from the cognitive shows promise as way to behaviorally define and develop such objectives. What kinds of study questions should the instructor write? Presumably, in keeping with typical behaviorally defined goals, one should write the kinds of questions that occasion responses capable of wide application or generality. But what kinds of questions would those be? Likely they would not be questions that ask for isolated facts or describe contexts having little relevance to situations in which the student would likely find him or herself in later years. These would be questions asking the student to apply what he or she has learned, either practically or verbally. Also they would probably be questions about situations that are novel and largely unpredictable, especially given that the effects of learning ideally are supposed to last for years and even decades. Early on, factual knowledge questions would be rather specific and produce discrete responses under tight control. Later, questions that evoke a wider range of applications in the world are used to help develop more creative responses that involve combining of elements. The latter type of questions is emphasized by educators (even if, for practical reasons, they are not always true to this goal), since knowledge that goes beyond the merely factual is considered the hallmark of education. Knowledge that goes beyond the factual is often called higher-level thinking. But what is it, and how do we teach it? In computer-aided PSI (CAPSI) courses at the University of Manitoba (Kinsner & Pear, 1990; Pear & Crone-Todd, 1999; Pear & Kinsner, 1988; Pear & Novak, 1996), rather than re-invent the wheel we are researching a question-level classification scheme called Bloom's taxonomy in the cognitive domain (Bloom, 1956; Crone-Todd et al., 2000; Pear et al, 2001). This classification scheme is a good starting point for behavior analysts studying higher-order thinking because it has face validity and its terms can be behaviorally defined. …

What and students do can be understood. By analyzing the classroom, can make themselves more organized and more responsible so that they can encounter fewer disappointments (Heward & Wood, 2003). This available method by which the environment can be analyzed to understand behavior is called Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). ABA is a scientific approach for discovering environmental variables that reliably influence socially significant behaviors and developing technology of behavior change that takes practical advantage of those discoveries (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007). Practitioners of ABA are guided by five documents regarding ethical behavior: Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2002), The Right to Effective Behavioral Treatment (Association for Behavior Analysis, 1989), The Right to Effective Education (Association for Behavior Analysis, 1990), Guidelines for Responsible Conduct for Behavior Analysts (Behavior Analyst Certification Board, 2001), and the Behavior AnalystTask List (Behavior Analyst Certification Board, 2005). Referring to these documents for guidance, behavior analysts can best answer three questions related to their service (Cooper et al., 2007): What is the right thing to do, what is worth doing, and what does it mean to be a good practitioner? By adhering to these guidelines, practitioners will have a ready source of reliable, accurate, and valid data to inform educational decision making. The methods of ABA have successfully served the public in a wide variety of areas. These areas include education (Dardig et al., 2005), health and exercise (De Luca & Holborn, 1992), language acquisition (Barbera & Kubina, 2005), AIDS prevention (DeVries, Burnette, & Redmon, 1991), and parenting (Kuhn, Lerman, & Vorndran, 2003). Several successful and popular methods using ABA principles in the classroom are Direct Instruction (Adams & Englemann, 1997; Englemann & Carnine, 1991), school-wide positive behavioral support (Tobin, Lewis-Palmer, & Sugai, 2001), curriculum based measurement, and curriculum matching (Hale et al., 2007). While treatment for autism is currently a popular area of research (Borrero & Borrero, 2008; Jerome, Frantino, & Sturmey, 2007), ABA methods have been established as effective for reducing target behaviors displayed by individuals with disabilities as well as non-disabled individuals (Didden, Duker, & Korzilius, 1997; Weisz, Weiss, Han, Granger, & Morton, 1995). Despite over 40 years of data supporting the effectiveness of behavior analytic methods, misconceptions and opposition remain. Opponents of ABA often attack the use of sequenced, structured instruction as compromising the intellectual development of the learner (Kim & Axelrod, 2005). Contrasting existing views in education and psychology, ABA seeks to identify present environmental contingencies that determine behavior rather than conform to mentalistic explanations of behavior. Further opposition to ABA claims that its methods are insensitive to the interests and needs of the learner. In putting the resistance to using ABA methods in schools in a nutshell, Glass (1993) may have said it best, teachers do not need data-based findings of experiments to decide how best to teach children. This popular resistance to the scientific method has been a significant barrier to the dissemination of ABA teaching techniques. That ABA has the documented empirical ability to address behaviors affecting education is now exceptionally relevant. The field has the means to assist schools in the development of effective assessment and intervention procedures (Kates-McElrath, Agnew, Axelrod, & Bloh, 2007). Recent federal legislation now mandates that schools use behavioral methods that have been employed in ABA since its inception. …

This case-based study of two school reform efforts in the USA examines how the process of inclusive education works for SEN students and the extent to which these students and their teachers feel as though they are an integral part of school reform. At its heart, this study focuses on three central questions. Do the philosophy, process, practices and organizational structures of these school reform movements promote inclusion for all students? What is the impact of the schools' practices and principles on individual students? What conditions and contexts best promote inclusion, and which ones act as barriers to successful inclusion? The schools in these two school reform movements provide powerful examples of how changes in school organization, climate, curriculum and instructional strategies build on the strengths of students, staff and community to create optimal learning results for all students. In this study, the perception of pedagogical and political ‘gaps’ between school effectiveness reform agendas and inclusive education reveal a narrow, rational-technical view of reform. The hope for the future is that the growing efforts in support of inclusive education within the broader socio-political and constructivist school reform movements, exemplified by the schools in this case study, will become an influential counter-force for social justice and disability-rights' action in schools everywhere.

Using a university-based training model, CABAS provides teacher training, supervisory support and administrative support to implement a system or school-wide program for students with various disabilities including visual impairment, mild to profound mental retardation, autism, learning disabilities, and emotional disturbances and has also been used to mainstream students. CABAS-trained teachers provide academic instruction and classroom behavior management based on a combination of technologies developed through scientific research in applied behavior analysis. These technologies include Direct Instruction, Precision Teaching, and PSI (Personalized System of Instruction) for staff and parent training. Instruction is individualized and based on measurable objectives. Supervisors provide teacher training and assist with data collect in the classroom. Teaching is adjusted as needed based on student performance. In a range of studies over 15 years, CABAS students made greater gains than non-CABAS students with smaller special education placement and significant cost reductions.

An eight-year-old boy with autism was taught to read using a combination of Direct Instruction and Precision Teaching. At the onset of the programme he had pronunciation problems and poor phonemic awareness and could not decode. In the absence of any designed Direct Instruction material in Icelandic, the present work implemented the Direct Instruction technique of teaching sounds and letters through multiple learning channels, in conjunction with Precision Teaching and frequency building exercises. SAFMEDS flashcards were used for some of the discrimination training, and an audio click was delivered as an informative feedback immediately after each correct responding during some of the instruction and fluency practices. The work was exploratory with the aim that the student would read Icelandic words at approximately 150 correct syllables per minute. One year follow-up assessments showed that he had retained the skill taught during the teaching intervention.

Foreword by Maxine Greene Preface An Introductory Overview of the 1980s School Reform Debate Pentagon vs. Multinational Capitalism: Political Economy of the 1980s School Reform Movement by Christine M. Shea A Critique of the Concept of Work in the School Reform Literature A Critique of the Concept of Work and Education in the School Reform Reports by Don T. Martin State's Stake in Educational Reform by Edward H. Berman Where Computers Are Taking Us in the Educational Field by Ernest Kahane and Andrew D. Oram Corporate Community on the Ideal Business-School Alliance: An Historical and Ethical Critique by Peter Sola Educational Reform and The New Equity Bootstrap Ideology of Educational Reform: What the Recent Reports Say about the Current and Future Status of Blacks in Higher Education? by Beverly M. Gordon More of the Same: Reforms of American Public Schooling and the Minority Language Student by Timothy G. Reagan Eighties Image of Girls and Women in the Educational Reform Literature: A Review of the Issues by Kathryn M. Borman and Patricia O'Reilly New Equity: Competing Visions by William T. Pink School Reform Proposals for The New Civic Education Reform and the Quest for a Unified Society: A Critique of R. Freeman Butts's Agenda for Civic Learning by Stuart A. McAninch An Evaluation of the Aims and Curriculum Proposals in Sizer's Horace's Compromise by John Martin Rich and Joseph L. DeVitis Is Continuing Education Anything More than a Yuppie Phenomenon? by Paul C. Violas Teachers, Their World, and Their Work: A Review of the Idea of Professional Excellence in School Reform Reports by Richard J. Altenbaugh Bibliography Index

Evidence-Based Educational Methods