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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
References marked with an asterisk indicate experiments included in the analysis.
2.
AultM. J.GastD. L.WoleryM. (1988). Comparison of progressive and constant time-delay procedures in teaching community-sign word reading. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 93, 44–56.
3.
BrowderD. M.D'HuyvettersK. K. (1988). An evaluation of transfer of stimulus control and of comprehension in sight word reading for children with mental retardation and emotional disturbance. School Psychology Review, 17, 331–342.
4.
BrowderD. M.HinesC.McCarthyL. J.FeesJ. (1984). A treatment package for increasing sight word recognition for use in daily living skills. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19, 191–200.
5.
BrowderD. M.MinarovicT. J. (2000). Utilizing sight words in self-instruction training for employees with moderate mental retardation in competitive jobs. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 78–79.
6.
BrowderD. M.SnellM. E.WildongerB. A. (1988). Simulation and community-based instruction of vending machines with time delay. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 33, 175–185.
7.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.HarrisA.WakemanS. (2008). A meta-analysis on teaching mathematics to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, pp. 407–432.
8.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.AlgozzineB. (2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.
9.
BrowderD. M.XinY. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 130–153.
10.
CollinsB. C. (2007). Moderate and severe disabilities: A foundational approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
11.
CollinsB. C.GriffenA. K. (1996). Teaching students with moderate disabilities to make safe responses to product warning labels. Education & Treatment of Children, 19, 30–45.
12.
CollinsB. C.StinsonD. M. (1994). Teaching generalized reading of product warning labels to adolescents with mental disabilities through the use of key words. Exceptionality, 5, 163–181.
13.
CuvoA. J.KlattK. P. (1992). Effects of community-based, videotape, and flash card instruction of community-referenced sight words on students with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 499–512.
14.
DoyleP. M.GastD. L. (1990). Use of constant time delay in small group instruction: A study of observational and incidental learning. The Journal of Special Education, 23, 369–385.
15.
DoyleP. M.SchusterJ. W.MeyerS. (1996). Embedding extra stimuli in the task direction: Effects on learning of students with moderate mental retardation. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 381–399.
16.
FarmerJ. A.GastD. L.WoleryM.WinterlingV. (1991). Small group instruction for students with severe handicaps: A study of observational learning. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26, 190–201.
17.
FiscusR. S.SchusterJ. W.MorseT. E.CollinsB. C. (2002). Teaching elementary students with cognitive disabilities food preparation skills while embedding instructive feedback in the prompt and consequence event. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 55–69.
18.
GastD. (1992). Teaching first-aid skills to students with moderate handicaps in small group instruction. Education & Treatment of Children, 15, 101–124.
19.
GastD. L.WoleryM.MorrisL. L.DoyleP. M.MeyerS. (1990). Teaching sight word reading in a group instruction arrangement using constant time delay. Exceptionality, 1, 81–96.
20.
HandenB. L.ZaneT. (1987). Delayed prompting: A review of procedural variations and results. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 8, 307–330.
21.
HaringT. G. (1996). The role of research in the continuing development of the field of severe disabilities. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 21, 6–9.
22.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–180.
23.
HughesT. A.FredrickL. D. (2006). Teaching vocabulary to students with learning disabilities using class wide peer tutoring and constant time delay. Journal of Behavioral Education, 15, 1–23.
24.
JamesonM. J.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.RiesenT.PolychronisS. (2007). A comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in the special education classroom. Education & Treatment of Children, 30, 23–44.
25.
KaiserA. P. (1990). Editorial: JASH in the 1990s. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 15, 1–2.
26.
KennedyC. H.ItkonenT.LindquistK. (1994). Nodality effects during equivalence class formation: An extension to sight-word reading and concept development. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 673–683.
27.
KouryM.BrowderD. M. (1986). The use of delay to teach sight words by peer tutors classified as moderately mentally retarded. Education and Training the Mentally Retarded, 21, 252–258.
28.
KratzerD. A.SpoonerF.TestD. W.KoorlandM. A. (1993). Extending the application of constant time delay: Teaching a requesting skill to students with severe multiple disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 16, 235–253.
29.
LalliJ. S.BrowderD. M. (1993). Comparison of sight word training procedures with validation of the most practical procedure in teaching reading for daily living. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 14, 107–127.
30.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.PolychronisS.RiesenT.JamesonM.KercherK. (2006). Comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in general education classes with small group instruction in general education classes with small group instruction in special education classes. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 125–138.
31.
MechlingL. C.CroninB. (2006). Computer-based video instruction to teach the use of augmentative and alternative communication devices for ordering at fast-food restaurants. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 234–245.
32.
MechlingL. C.GastD. L. (2003). Multi-media instruction to teach grocery word associations and store location: A study of generalization. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 62–76.
33.
MinarovicT. J.BambaraL. M. (2007). Teaching employees with intellectual disabilities to manage changing work routines using varied sight-word checklists. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 32, 31–42.
34.
MiracleS. A.CollinsB. C.SchusterJ. W.Grisham-BrownJ. (2001). Peer- versus teacher-delivered instruction: Effects on acquisition and maintenance. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 373–385.
35.
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education.ShavelsonR. J.TowneL. (Eds.), Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36.
No Child Left Behind Act 2001. Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat.1425 (2002).
37.
NoonanM. J.ReeseR. M. (1984). Educability: Public policy and the role of research. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 9, 8–15.
38.
PolychronisS. C.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.RiesenT.JamesonM. (2004). A comparison of two trail distribution schedules in embedded instruction. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 140–151.
39.
RohenaE. I.JitendraA. K.BrowderD. M. (2002). Comparison of the effects of Spanish and English constant time delay instruction on sight word reading by Hispanic learners with mental retardation. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 169–184.
40.
SchoenS. F.OgdenS. (1995). Impact of time delay, observational learning, and attentional cuing upon word recognition during integrated small-group instruction. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25, 503–519.
41.
SchusterJ. W.GriffenA. K.WoleryM. (1992). Comparison of simultaneous prompting and constant time delay procedures in teaching sight words to elementary students with moderate mental retardation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2, 305–325.
42.
SchusterJ. W.MorseT.AultM. J.DoyleP. M.CrawfordM. R.WoleryM. (1998). Constant time delay and chained tasks: A review of literature. Education & Treatment of Children, 21, 74–106.
43.
SchusterJ. W.MorseT. E.GriffenA. B.WoleryM. (1996). Teaching peer reinforcement and grocery words: An investigation of observational learning and instructive feedback. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 511–533.
44.
SidmanM.StoddardL. (1967). The effectiveness of facing in programming a simultaneous form discrimination for retarded children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 10, 3–15.
45.
SnellM. E.BrownF. (2006). Designing and implementing instructional programs. In SnellM. E.BrownF. (Eds.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (6th ed., pp. 111–169). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
46.
SnellM. E.GastD. L. (1981). Applying time delay procedure to the instruction of the severely handicapped. The Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6, 3–14.
47.
SpoonerF.BrowderD. M. (2003). Scientifically based research in education and students with low incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 28, 117–125.
48.
SPSS, Inc. (2004). SPSS for Windows (Rel.14.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: Author.
49.
StinsonD. M.GastD. L.WoleryM.CollinsB. C. (1991). Acquisition of nontargeted information during small-group instruction. Exceptionality, 2, 65–80.
50.
TerraceH. S. (1963a). Discrimination learning with and without “errors.”Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 1–27.
51.
TerraceH. S. (1963b). Errorless transfer of discrimination across two continua. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 223–232.
52.
TestD. W.SpoonerF.CookeN. L. (1987). Educational validity revisited. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 12, 96–102.
53.
TouchetteP. (1971). Transfer of stimulus control: Measuring the moment of transfer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 223–232.
54.
VoeltzL. M.EvansI. M. (1983). Educational validity: Procedures to evaluate outcomes in programs for severely handicapped learners. The Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8, 3–15.
55.
WallM. E.GastD. L. (1997). Caregivers' use of constant time delay to teach leisure skills to adolescents or young adults with moderate or severe intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 32, 340–356.
56.
WilliamsD. M.CollinsB. C. (1994). Teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities: Teacher selected versus student selected material prompts within the delay procedure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 589–597.
57.
WoleryM.DoyleP. M.AultM. J.GastD. L.MeyerS.StinsonD. (1991). Effects of presenting incidental information in consequent events on future learning. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1, 79–104.
58.
WoleryM.GastD. L. (1984). Effective and efficient procedures for the transfer of stimulus control. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4, 52–77.
59.
WoleryM.HolcombeA.CybriwskyC.DoyleP. M.SchusterJ. W.AultM. J. (1992). Constant time delay with discrete responses: A review of effectiveness and demographic, procedural, and methodological parameters. Research and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 239–266.
60.
WoleryM.WertsM. G.SnyderE. D.CaldwellN. K. (1994). Efficacy of constant time delay implemented by peer tutors in general education classrooms. Journal of Behavioral Education, 4, 415–436.
61.
ZhangJ.GastD.HorvatM.DattiloJ. (1995). The effectiveness of a constant time delay procedure on teaching lifetime sport skills to adolescents with severe to profound intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 51–64.
