The Effects of CAI and Time Delay: A Systematic Program for Teaching Spelling

Kinney, Patricia G.

doi:10.1177/016264348800900201

Cited by 26 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Possibly the most attractive element of the time-delay procedure is the potential for errorless learning due to the option of waiting for the prompt before responding. The 12.8% average error rate reported here is higher than those reported in previous studies involving time-delay with students who were mildly handicapped Kinney et al, 1988;Mattingly & Bott, 1990;Stevens & Schuster, 1987). Error rates reported in these studies ranged from 0.4% to 4.8% across all subjects and training trials.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 68%

“…An analysis of probe condition data for the 4 students who completed the study showed that scores on posttraining computerized probes varied and were often below the 100% correct responding exhibited at the end of training. These declines in accuracy during computerized probes are cause for concern because they are more substantial than reported for posttraining probe conditions in other time-delay investigations involving learners with mild handicaps (Kinney et al, 1988;Mattingly & Bott, 1990;Stevens & Schuster, 1987). One procedural difference that may account for these findings is that previous studies continued training on all items in the training set until each student reached criterion on the entire set.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Therefore, the number of training trials per 5-s delay session depended on the number of trails required to get all words into the review bank or a maximum of 30 trials (whichever came first). A maximum of 30 training trials was chosen because it approximated the number of trials per session used in previous time-delay spelling research studies with mildly handicapped students (Kinney et al, 1988;Stevens & Schuster, 1987), and the amount of time needed for 30 training trials matched the preexisting classroom schedule for time allotted to individual spelling lessons.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Teaching Memorized Spelling With a Microcomputer: Time Delay and Computer‐assisted Instruction

Stevens

Blackhurst

Slaton

1991

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A computer-assisted instruction program was evaluated that used a constant time-delay procedure to teach 5 students 18 spelling words. In addition to delivering the instructional procedure, the program managed the presentation of training content based on individual student responding and collected instructional data on individual student performance. The procedure was effective at teaching 4 of the 5 students the words, and generalization occurred from the computer-delivered keyboard response format to a teacher-delivered hand-written response format. Maintenance data varied among the students. The study demonstrated the feasibility of using microcomputers to deliver time-delay instruction in special education classrooms and suggested several research questions related to specific features of microcomputer-delivered time-delay instruction.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 68%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Teaching Memorized Spelling With a Microcomputer: Time Delay and Computer‐assisted Instruction

Stevens

Blackhurst

Slaton

1991

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A teaching package that included a delayed word-construction procedure then established these computerized anagram spelling performances. The findings replicated those of Stromer and Mackay (1992a) and extended that study because written spelling to the computer pictures also reliably emerged (see also Kinney, Stevens, & Schuster, 1988; Goodman & Remington, 1991) and have implications for understanding the role of mediating behavior in promoting treatment generality (Gutowski, Geren, Stromer, & Mackay, 1995;see also Kirby & Bickel, 1988;Stokes & Baer, 1977; press). Overall, the present studies contribute to a growing stimulus control technology for establishing functional vocabulary skills (e.g., Browder & Lalli, 1991;Mackay, 1991;McIlvane, 1992;Remington, 1994;Singh & Singh, 1986;Stromer et al, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Teaching Computer‐based Spelling to Individuals With Developmental and Hearing Disabilities: Transfer of Stimulus Control to Writing Tasks

Stromer

Mackay

Howell

et al. 1996

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer‐based instruction may yield widely useful handwritten spelling. Illustrative cases involved individuals with mental retardation and hearing impairments. The participant in Study 1 matched computer pictures and printed words to one another but did not spell the words to pictures. Spelling was then taught using a computerized procedure. In general, increases in the accuracy of computer spelling were accompanied by improvements in written spelling to pictures. Study 2 extended these results with a 2nd participant. After initial training, spelling improved in the context of a retrieval task in which the participant (a) wrote a list of the names of objects displayed on a table, (b) selected the objects from a shelf, and (c) returned the objects to the table. Nearly perfect accuracy scores declined on some retrieval trials conducted without a list, suggesting that the list may have served a mediating function during retrieval. Transfer of stimulus control of computer‐based teaching to the retrieval task may have been attributable to the existence of stimulus classes involving pictures, objects, and printed words.

show abstract

“…In the first study (Kinney, Stevens, 8c Schuster, 1988) the subject, a 12-year-old boy in a tutorial setting, achieved 100% accuracy on three sets of five state names. Performance improved from none correct on the initial trial to means of 85% to 90% correct (PND = 92%) during training sessions.…”

Section: Constant Time Delay With Caimentioning

confidence: 99%

Spelling Interventions for Students With Disabilities: A Review

Fulk

Stormont-Spurgin

1995

J Spec Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews published research on spelling interventions designed for students with learning disabilities (LD) who are poor spellers. Thirty-eight spelling studies, including singlesubject and group designs, were located. Study interventions consisted of four types: instructional techniques, computer-assisted instruction, study strategies, and multisensory/modality training. These studies are discussed here with regard to subjects, methods, and findings. Conclusions and implications for spelling instruction and for future research are presented.Students with learning disabilities (LD) have lower achievement levels than their low-achieving nondisabled peers across all subject areas, but spelling ability is the most powerful discriminator between students with LD and other low achievers (Deshler, Schumaker, Alley, Warner, & Clark, 1982). Although spelling deficits are frequently identified during elementary school years, these deficits increase as students reach secondary education levels (Poplin, Gray, Larsen, Banikowski, 8c Mehring, 1980). One study documented a third-grade mean spelling score among seventh-grade adolescents with LD (Deshler, Schumaker, Alley, Warner, 8c Clark, 1982).Spelling is closely related to other subjects, particularly to reading (Beers, 1980). However, controversy exists between researchers who contend that spelling is a natural extension of reading and others (e.g., Chomsky, 1979) who argue that writing, a more concrete task, developmentally occurs first (see Vacca, Vacca, 8cGove, 1987, for a discussion). Nevertheless, agreement exists that spelling is a more difficult task than reading (Frith, 1980;Nelson, 1980); it requires production of an exact sequence of letters, offers no contextual clues, and requires greater numbers of grapheme-to-phoneme decisions.There are several possible reasons for the persistence of severe spelling deficits for students with LD. First, teacher preparation for spelling instruction may be overlooked, due to an overriding emphasis on the instruction of reading and mathematics. Second, minimal instructional time may be allocated to spelling due to beliefs that spelling is of secondary importance in today's extensive curriculum. Third, believing that students acquired these techniques in the primary grades, teachers may neglect instruction in effective spelling strategies. Address: Barbara Mushinski Fulk, Special Education Section, School of Education, LAEB, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907.However, there are reasons to be optimistic about helping students with LD to learn to spell. First, the spelling skill of students with LD is similar developmentally to that of nondisabled students (Gerber, 1986). Second, cognitive strategies, such as those employed for spelling, are generalizable to other academic areas, particularly with training for transfer and teacher prompts (Deshler et al., 1983). Third, in 35 of the 38 spelling interventions presented in this review, explicit spelling instruction resulted in improved spelling performance.Given th...

show abstract

The Effects of CAI and Time Delay: A Systematic Program for Teaching Spelling

Cited by 26 publications

References 6 publications

Teaching Memorized Spelling With a Microcomputer: Time Delay and Computer‐assisted Instruction

Teaching Memorized Spelling With a Microcomputer: Time Delay and Computer‐assisted Instruction

Teaching Computer‐based Spelling to Individuals With Developmental and Hearing Disabilities: Transfer of Stimulus Control to Writing Tasks

Spelling Interventions for Students With Disabilities: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About