Abstract
Keywords
Some students with visual impairments have not learned to read print or braille due to a variety of factors. According to the American Printing House for the Blind (2019), 30.44% of students who are legally blind across the United States were classified as nonreaders, and only 41.46% of students with visual impairments used braille or print as their primary source of reading media. Additionally, the reading development of students with visual impairments often lags behind their same-age peers (Douglas et al., 2004; Gompel et al., 2002; Wall Emerson et al., 2009). The inability to read proficiently affects all areas of a person's life. Thus, it is essential that teachers of students with visual impairments (hereafter called “teachers”) are systematic and use research-based practices in teaching students with visual impairments, including those with intellectual disabilities, to read print or braille or both (Hooper et al., 2014). Students who are visually impaired should receive comprehensive reading instruction that includes all of the components identified by the National Reading Panel (2000). The five critical components are phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
Constant time delay is an evidence-based practice that has an extensive body of research supporting its use in literacy instruction. It is an explicit method of instruction that provides immediate feedback (Bradley & Noell, 2018). Once students anticipate the word, the need for the controlling prompt fades, and the teacher begins to use a fixed time delay lasting from 3 to 10 seconds (Bradley & Noell, 2018). This method was effectively used to teach sight words, pseudowords, and picture recognition (Appelman et al., 2014; Bradley & Noell, 2018). Students also generalized words using this method in both the classroom and community (Swain et al., 2014).
Wolery et al. (1992) examined 36 constant time delay studies dating back to 1977. The authors determined that constant time delay is an effective method for teaching discrete behaviors such as reading sight words or recognizing letters to 169 of the 173 subjects (Wolery et al., 1992). The method has been adapted in some of the studies to increase success. Examples of adaptations include adding attending cues, expanding directions for tasks, and increasing teacher support (Wolery et al., 1992). Although not all studies tracked information about the generalization and maintenance of what was learned through constant time delay, the majority of the studies that recorded these data found the students generalized and maintained the targeted behaviors (Wolery et al., 1992). Browder et al. (2009) agreed there is strong evidence for using time delay to teach sight words to students with moderate intellectual disabilities, and that the method holds promise for teaching similar skills to students with profound intellectual disabilities. They recommended further research on the effectiveness of using time delay when teaching symbols for subject matter such as math and geography (Browder et al., 2009).
The effectiveness of the constant time delay method in teaching braille skills to students with visual impairments and additional disabilities was not explored until more recently. Constant time delay was used with three students who were making the transition from print to braille in learning up to 40 words or Nemeth Code symbols in a one-month time frame (Ivy & Hooper, 2015). Also, four students with visual impairments and additional disabilities learned to read highly motivating words in braille using this method (Hooper et al., 2014). Thus, there was preliminary evidence of its effectiveness to teach braille recognition.
The current study explored the use of constant time delay in teaching braille contractions. The following research questions were explored:
Would constant time delay be an efficient strategy to teach the 12 final-letter groupsigns in isolation? Would the targeted groupsigns be generalized into reading words and assist with fluency and automaticity? To what extent would the tactual recognition of final-letter groupsigns be maintained after the completion of the intervention?
Method
Participant
Approval to conduct the research presented here was obtained from the Institutional Review Board at the University of South Carolina Upstate, and informed consent was obtained. The participant in this case study was a 16-year-old girl named Kate. She was diagnosed with bilateral anophthalmia and an intellectual disability. She was a third-year student at a school for students with sensory losses and additional disabilities. Kate used a modified academic curriculum and was reading at a first-grade reading level. One year prior to the start of the study, Kate correctly read 55 out of 180 braille contractions on a teacher-made assessment, which included the alphabetic wordsigns, five strong groupsigns, and 27 shortform words.
At the beginning of the study, Kate could read 103 braille contractions in isolation, but she was unable to read any of the 12 final-letter groupsigns in isolation or as parts of words. Kate's reading fluency and comprehension was inhibited by her lack of knowledge of these braille contractions. She struggled to read longer words and resorted to either spelling them out letter by letter or skipping the word altogether. Promoting fluency was an important consideration when deciding how to teach Kate new contractions. The teacher chose to have Kate learn the sounds the contractions made and not focus on the spellings of the contractions.
For example, Kate learned that dots 5-6 followed by dots 1-3-4-5-6 stood for “ity” as opposed to “i-t-y.” It was hypothesized by the teacher that focusing on the sounds contractions made would assist Kate in more quickly decoding words.
Setting and Materials
Braille instruction took place after school or in Kate's classroom during the school day. She also continued to receive 60 min of language arts and reading instruction daily. The supplemental braille instruction lasted 30 min and, after the first week, was held 3 times a week. The final groupsigns were divided into four sets of contractions. The top right corner of each flashcard was clipped to assist with orientation. The teacher elected not to use the full braille cell, lead lines of dots 2-5, or the dot locator for mention on the flashcards, so the student would not confuse these with part of the groupsign. The student was unfamiliar with the dot locator for mention and did not know its purpose. When the student read a full cell in braille, she consistently identified it as the wordsign “for” and did not understand other potential uses for that symbol. The lead lines were not deemed appropriate, since the teacher was concerned these would cause confusion for the student when she attempted to read the contraction in a word in future lessons. From the beginning of the study, Kate easily located each contraction on the card. The teacher began with final-letter contractions that differed tactually, so Kate would not become confused by contractions that were more similar tactually.
Procedures
Two fixed-time intervals were used during instruction. In sessions where Kate was introduced to new contractions, the teacher provided the cue, “What contraction is this?” and the controlling prompt, “This contraction is…,” which Kate was to repeat immediately (0 seconds).
Three contractions were introduced in two trials during this initial phase of instruction. Trials lasted approximately 4 to 5 min, and the targeted contractions were practiced 10 times within each trial. See Figure 1 for a sample data collection tool.
Sample Data Collection Tool for Introduction of Contractions.
Two additional trials were incorporated if the student did not meet the preestablished mastery level of 90%. In sessions where Kate was reviewing contractions, there were a minimum of three trials. During each trial, contractions were reviewed a minimum of 5 times. These trials lasted 5 to 10 min, increasing in time as Kate learned additional contractions. The teacher provided the cue, “What contraction is this?” and then the teacher paused for 5 second to allow Kate to answer. If Kate provided the correct response without the controlling prompt, it was marked as a correct anticipation. When Kate needed the controlling prompt to produce a correct response, the teacher noted it as a correct wait. A nonwait error was assigned if Kate gave an incorrect response before the controlling prompt or failed to track the braille. Kate received a wait error if she answered mistakenly after the controlling prompt or did not track braille after the prompt. If Kate failed to respond after the controlling prompt, she received a no-response error. Recordkeeping for this phase was tracked on a worksheet with the five types of responses listed, the contractions, the date, and any comments made by the student (see Figure 2 for a sample data collection tool). The teacher provided the same reinforcement of a “high five” each time the student produced a correct response. Any contractions missed were reviewed at the end of the trial.
Sample Data Collection Tool for Review of Contractions.
After Kate scored 100% anticipation on the first six final-letter groupsigns introduced, Kate's teacher examined if Kate could generalize these groupsigns into words by playing a game called “Hole in One.” The words “mount,” “bless,” “sound,” “song,” “dance,” and “mission” were placed in braille on popsicle sticks. At first, these words were selected based on the student's interest and overall simplicity. Kate loved music and dancing so the words “song” and “dance” were included. If Kate read the word correctly, she could put it in a cup. If she read it incorrectly, it went back on the table. When presented with the first word, “mount,” Kate initially read it as “m-ount.” On her second attempt, she read “mountain.” When trying to read “dance,” her first attempt was “dant,” and her second attempt was “d-ance.” Kate correctly read the four other words on the first and all subsequent attempts and read “mount” and “dance” correctly on the third and fourth attempts. Since Kate was so successful, 18 words were added as she learned the remaining final-letter contractions. As the intervention progressed, commonly used words in classroom reading passages were incorporated, especially words that the student had struggled to read previously. By the end of the study, she could read all 24 words quickly and accurately both in isolation and within sentences.
Results Week 1
In the first trial, Kate reviewed each contraction 10 times. If she repeated the verbiage, “This contraction is…,” with the correct pronunciation of the contraction, it was marked as accurate. She achieved 80% accuracy with “ance” and 100% with “less” and “ound.” In the second trial, Kate reached 90% accuracy with “ance” and 100% with the other two. Since Kate reached the 90% goal in the second trial, a 5-second delay was implemented in the third trial.
Kate's lowest score, 0%, occurred during this trial, after a 4-day break in the intervention. Kate required a control prompt for two of the three contractions, and she received a nonwait error for the third contraction, “ance.” The teacher reverted to a 0-second delay to review these contractions. Kate reached 100% accuracy with all three contractions during the review, so the teacher transitioned back to a 5-second delay in the last trial of the session. During this trial, each contraction was reviewed 6 times. Kate received 100% accuracy with two of the three contractions. For the third contraction, “ance,” Kate received two nonwait errors and four correct anticipations.
Weeks 2–6
In the 19 subsequent trials, Kate scored 90% or higher accuracy on the contractions. With Contraction Set A, Kate identified “ance” as “and” 2 times. This was marked as a nonwait error both times. Three of Kate's four total nonwait errors were due to her identifying “ance” as “and.” Kate's fourth nonwait error happened in Contraction Set D with the contraction “tion.” She identified this as “beneath.” Kate confused “beneath” with “tion” in Phase 1 with Contraction Set D. The teacher gave the controlling prompt, “This contraction is tion.” Kate began her usual response but then corrected the teacher and told her the contraction was “beneath.” The teacher showed Kate the difference tactually between “beneath” and “tion” and instructed her that this dot configuration was the contraction “tion.”
In all, Kate needed five controlling prompts throughout the 5-second delay sessions for the contraction “ment.” She needed four controlling prompts for the contraction “ful,” and three controlling prompts for the contraction “ity.” Eight of the remaining nine contractions were given two or less controlling prompts during Phase 2. In all of the sessions, utilizing a 5-second delay, Kate did not require a controlling prompt or make a nonwait error for the contraction “ong.” The teacher speculated this was due to its lack of similarity with other contractions in this study. On five occasions a controlling prompt was provided due to Kate's self-talk. On these occasions, self-talk happened after the cue. The teacher counted to five as usual and administered the controlling prompt while Kate was still talking to herself. The controlling prompt redirected Kate's thoughts, and she provided the correct response.
Week 7
On the last two trials in the final session, Kate scored 100% accuracy for correct anticipations with all 12 contractions. On the posttest, she had 97% correct anticipations and only needed one controlling prompt out of 36 total attempts to identify a contraction. She required a prompt for “ence” which was one of the three contractions learned in the last set. In the full contraction assessment administered at the end of the study, the only final-letter groupsign Kate struggled with was “ment.” She asked the teacher what it was, and the teacher asked her if she could remember. Kate provided the answer “ment.”
Discussion
At the end of the study, the participant was independently identifying all 12 contractions. The results of this study were similar to previous studies using constant time delay to teach braille symbols and motivating words to students with additional disabilities (Hooper et al., 2014; Ivy & Hooper, 2015). Teaching Kate the sounds the contractions made allowed for a smooth transition to reading the targeted contractions in words and sentences. Kate was able to generalize these final-letter contractions to read multiple new words. Since she could now automatically decode words containing final-letter contractions, her overall reading comprehension improved. Her vocabulary also increased while learning these new contractions. For example, when reading the word “garment,” she seemed confused. After a brief discussion, she was able to identify the garments she was wearing. She also made real-world connections while reading words containing these contractions. When reading “ground,” she repeated the word and then stated, “Oh, yeah, like the ground is under my feet.”
The teacher was surprised that Kate initially achieved less than 90% on the first trial of phase one since she was simply repeating what the teacher said. However, the teacher understood that the novelty of the constant-time delay format along with Kate's intellectual disability most likely contributed to this initial struggle. Once Kate fully understood the expectations and format, she easily achieved success in the first phase. In Phase 2, Kate also initially experienced difficulty in tactually distinguishing “beneath” from “tion.” It took processing time and additional practice for Kate to accurately distinguish between these tactually similar dot configurations.
The study ended in November 2019. The teacher continued to review the final-letter groupsigns to see if Kate showed any signs of regression. After the mid-winter break, Kate retained knowledge of all the contractions learned in this study. Due to the coronavirus, Kate did not attend school and participated in virtual learning from mid-March until the end of the school year. The teacher was unable to continue the review of the final-letter groupsigns. In late August 2020, Kate returned to school and could name eight of the final-letter groupsign contractions. Kate's teacher used the constant time delay method by administering a cue. This helped Kate recall 11 of the 12 contractions without assistance almost immediately. By mid-September 2020, Kate could easily name all final-letter groupsigns in isolation and in words.
The teacher recommends further studies using constant time delay to learn groupsigns. A larger population is needed to draw conclusive evidence. However, this case study can help inform future studies and guide teachers considering the use of constant time delay to teach braille contractions. Further studies incorporating flashcards without the use of braille lead lines to teach contractions are also recommended.
The constant time delay method was easy to incorporate within the classroom and a time-efficient strategy for teaching the final-letter contractions. The promise shown in studies implementing constant time delay for students with visual impairments and additional disabilities should not be overlooked when exploring learning strategies for teaching new concepts and skills.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.