Abstract

The purpose of the present study is twofold: (a) to test the repeatability of the superiority of the percentage of data points exceeding the median of the baseline phase (PEM) approach over the percentage of nonoverlapping data (PND) approach for the synthetic analysis of single-subject researches, and (b) to demonstrate the application of the PEM approach in conducting a quantitative synthesis of single -subject researches, which investigated the effectiveness of interventions on academic behaviors. The analyzed studies were obtained through a computer-assisted search of the relevant databases and a hand search of the relevant behavior analysis journals. The major finding demonstrates the repeatability of the superiority of the PEM approach over that of the PND. Key words: PEM approach (the percentage of data points exceeding the median of the baseline phase); PND approach (the percentage of nonoverlapping data); Synthetic analysis of single-subject researches. ********** The purpose of the present study is twofold: (a) to test the repeatability of the superiority of the percentage of data points exceeding the median of baseline phase (PEM) approach (Ma, 2006) over the percentage of nonoverlapping data (PND) approach (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1985-86) for the synthetic analysis of single -subject researches, and (b) to demonstrate the application of the PEM approach in conducting a quantitative synthesis of single-subject researches, which investigated the effectiveness of interventions on academic behaviors. Ma's (2006) study showed that PEM approach had a higher validity than the PND approach with respect to the intercorrelations of their effect size scores with original authors' judgments as well as the closeness of means of effect size in each of three categories of original authors' judgment (highly moderately and not effective) to the criteria set by Scruggs, Mastropieri, Cook, & Escobar (1986), i.e., PEM approach had higher rank correlations with original authors' judgments than PND approach did, and Mean effect size of the PEM approach in each of the categories of effectiveness fell in the range set by Scruggs, et al. (1986), but that of the PND approach fell outside of the range. Ma (2006) described and discussed the methodology of PEM approach in detail. Whether his findings are repeatable has to be tested. The second purpose of the present study therefore is to use the PEM approach to conduct a systhetic analysis of the effectiveness of interventions on academic behaviors. Numerous educational and psychological researchers have used single-subject experimental designs to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions intended to promote academic behaviors. It is therefore meaningful to conduct a synthetic analysis to determine whether these intervention strategies are effective and which one shows a larger effectiveness. Through a review of the literature, it is possible to identify several intervention strategies which have been adopted by behavior analysts to enhance academic behaviors, such as computer-assisted instruction (Higgins and Boone, 1990; Howell, Sidorenko, & Jurica, 1987); cooperative learning (Pigott, Fantuzzo, & Clement, 1986; Olympia, Sheridan, Jenson, & Andrews, 1994; Cushing & Kennedy, 1997); mastery learning (McDowell & Keenan, 2001); reinforcement (Noell, et al. 1998; Lloyd, Eberhardt, & Drake, 1996; Gillat & Sulzer & Azaroff, 1994); self-control training (Stevenson & Fantuzzo, 1986; Harris, 1986; Robert, Nelson, & Olson, 1987; Dunlap & Dunlap, 1989; Lloyd, Bateman, Landrum, & Hallahan, 1989); social learning (Stevenson & Fantuzzo; 1984); instruction in learning strategies including instruction in cognitive and metacognative strategies (Montague, 1992), training in phonological awareness training and in word analogies (O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 2000), story mapping technique (Babyak, Koorland & Mathes, 2000; Gardill & Jitendra, 1999; Gurney, Gersten, Dimino, & Carnine 1990; Idol, 1987; Newby, Caldwell, & Recht, 1989), and training in the question-asking (Knapczyk, 1989). …

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call