1980
DOI: 10.1177/019874298000500309
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Procedures for Analyzing Student Performance Data to Generate Hypotheses for the Purpose of Educational Decision Making

Abstract: Three psychiatric teacher-counselors and five students from a residential mental health treatment facility for adolescents with behavior disorders were used to determine if consistent use of a 14-step planning strategy would result in student increases in academic performance. The planning strategy included analysis of error types and analysis of correct and error performance trends in the student's daily work. Daily interviews were conducted to determine which planning strategies were being employed by the te… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

1983
1983
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Three studies implemented token reinforcement, which resulted in low to moderate improvements in academic performance. Three studies implemented antecedent interventions focused on the subject area of math (Center et al, 1982;Lovitt & Curtiss, 1969;Stowitscheck, Lewis, Shores, & Ezzell, 1980). Studies that included student choice or student interest in their intervention (Clarke et al, 1995;Cole, Davenport, Bambara, & Ager, 1997;Cosden, Gannon, & Haring, 1995;Jolivette, Wehby, Canale, & Massey, 2001) showed positive results (mean effect size = 0.005 to 1.47) for improving the academic performance of children with EBD.…”
Section: Effect Sizesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three studies implemented token reinforcement, which resulted in low to moderate improvements in academic performance. Three studies implemented antecedent interventions focused on the subject area of math (Center et al, 1982;Lovitt & Curtiss, 1969;Stowitscheck, Lewis, Shores, & Ezzell, 1980). Studies that included student choice or student interest in their intervention (Clarke et al, 1995;Cole, Davenport, Bambara, & Ager, 1997;Cosden, Gannon, & Haring, 1995;Jolivette, Wehby, Canale, & Massey, 2001) showed positive results (mean effect size = 0.005 to 1.47) for improving the academic performance of children with EBD.…”
Section: Effect Sizesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Today emphasis is on preparing special education teachers along noncategorical lines (Heward, Cooper, Heron, Hill, McCormick, Porter, Stephens, & Sutherland, 1981;Smith & Neisworth, 1975). Advocates of a noncategorical approach argue that (a) categories are not educationally relevant ; rather, with few exceptions, instructional materials and procedures are not category-specific (Reynolds, 1979;Stowitschek, Lewis, Shores, & Ezzell, 1980); Categorical groupings overlap, with individual differences eften as great Yvithin as across classifications & Larsen, and diagnostic labeis can lead to negative and stereotypic perof exceptional learners (e.g., EMR) (Smith & Neisworth, 1975). Still, as Brito and Reynolds (1979) have pointed empirical support for noncategorical teacher is virtually nonexistent.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each practice is shown with a representative reference; multiple references for practice are not listed because of space constraints. The interventions are listed in alphabetical order as labeled by the author in each study: antecedent pausing (Hawkins, 1988), constant time delay (Wolery, Cybriwsky, Gast, & Boyle-Gast, 1991), contingent reinforcement (McEvoy & Brady, 1988), cover, copy, and compare (Skinner, Beatty, Turco, & Rasavage, 1989), error correction strategy (Grskovic & Belfiore, 1996), increased opportunities to respond (Sutherland, Alder, & Gunter, 2003), peer tutoring (Franca, Kerr, Reitz, & Lambert, 1990), personalized system of instruction (McLaughlin, 1991), phonological awareness training (Lane, O'Shaughnessy, Lambros, Gresham, & BeebeFrankenberger, 2001), positive practice plus positive reinforcement (Ollendick, Matson, Esveldt-Dawson, & Shapiro, 1980), previewing procedure (Rose, 1984), selfmonitoring (Carr & Punzo, 1993), sequential prompt technique (Schloss, Harriman, & Pfeifer, 1985), story mapping (Babyak, Koorland, & Mathes, 2000), strategy instruction: history strategy instruction, musical strategy instruction, mnemonic strategy instruction (Cade & Gunter, 2002), taped word intervention (Shapiro & McCurdy, 1989), threeterm contingency trials (Albers & Greer, 1991), trend and error analysis (Stowitschek, Lewis, Shores, & Ezzell, 1980), and written feedback (McLaughlin, 1992).…”
Section: Degree To Which Minimal Qis Were Met In Stage IImentioning
confidence: 99%