This article presents the results of a comprehensive review of 128 studies on teaching reading to individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. The review compared these studies against the National Reading Panel's components of reading; although it revealed an inadequate consideration of the components of reading, it found strong evidence for teaching sight words using systematic prompting and fading. The reviewers considered not only the number of studies, but also indicators proposed for evidence-based practice and effect size. This study identified some high quality studies with strong effect size for comprehension and fluency, but only one phonics study was strong in both quality and effects. Additional research is needed to promote broader skills in literacy for this population.

This article reports on a comprehensive literature review and meta-analysis of 68 experiments on teaching mathematics to individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Most of the studies in the review addressed numbers and computation or measurement. Within the computation studies identified, most focused on counting, calculation, or number matching. For the measurement studies, nearly all focused on money skills. Of the 54 single subject design studies, 19 were classified as having all quality indicators for research design (13 representing the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Measurement standard and 6 representing the Numbers and Operations standard). These studies offer strong evidence for using systematic instruction to teach mathematics skills and for using in vivo settings.

The purpose of this review was to examine the body of research on teaching mathematics to students with moderate and severe developmental disability that has been published since 2005, reflecting changes in both the academic expectations for this population and research and design standards in the evidence-based practice (EBP) era. We examined research on teaching mathematical skills for students with moderate and severe developmental disability from 2005–2016 and found 36 studies (33 single-case and three group-experimental studies), updating the Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Harris, and Wakeman analysis. Of the 36 studies included in the review, 22 single-case and three group-design studies received a rating of high or adequate quality using the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT) indicator criteria. In addition to systematic instruction, instructional procedures of technology-aided instruction, graphic organizers, manipulatives, and explicit instruction were found to be EBPs in teaching mathematics to this population.

A review of the literature was conducted for articles published between 1975 and 2007 on the application of time delay as an instructional procedure to teach word and picture recognition to students with severe developmental disabilities in an effort to evaluate time delay as an evidence-based practice. A total of 30 experiments were analyzed using quality indicators for single-subject design research. In general, we found that time delay was an evidence-based practice for teaching picture and sight word recognition supported by standards for evidence-based practice proposed by Horner et al. (2005). We discuss lessons learned in summarizing a body of literature to define an evidence-based practice and suggestions for better defining the practice.

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.