Embedding instructive feedback into teacher-student interactions during independent seat work

The effects of embedding a constant time delay procedure into an independent seat work activity and using instructive feedback were evaluated in this study. Seven students with mild disabilities participated in the study that occurred in their special education classroom. A multiple probe design across sets of target behaviors was used, and students' responses to instructive feedback stimuli were evaluated during each probe condition. The procedures were implemented with a high degree of fidelity, and the results indicate that (a) the students acquired the target behaviors taught with the constant time delay procedure that was embedded into independent seat work, and (b) the students acquired some but not all of the responses to the instructive feedback stimuli. These findings are discussed in terms of using instructive feedback in classrooms and future research on instructive feedback.     

Instructive feedback: A comparison of simultaneous and alternating presentation of non-target stimuli

Instructive feedback involves presenting extra, non-target stimuli in the consequent events for children's responses. Two methods of presenting instructive feedback during direct instruction were compared. These methods involved presenting two extra stimuli on all trials, and presenting the two extra stimuli separately on alternating trials. Preschool students were taught coin combinations using a constant time delay procedure with instructive feedback stimuli added to both praise and correction statements. An adapted alternating treatments design was used to evaluate the two methods of presenting instructive feedback. The students were assessed to determine the extent to which instructive feedback stimuli were learned. The results indicate that students learned some of the instructive feedback stimuli and no consistent differences in the effectiveness of the two presentation methods were noted. Further, relationships between the two instructive feedback stimuli appeared to be established. Implications for instruction and future research are discussed.     

Efficacy of constant time delay implemented by peer tutors in general education classrooms

We evaluated the effects of teaching 13 typically developing children to use constant time delay when tutoring three of their peers who had substantial disabilities. We measured the extent to which the tutors used the constant time delay procedure correctly and the tutees' correct performance on the skills being taught. A multiple probe design across behaviors was used. The results indicated that (a) the tutors used each step of the constant time delay with a high degree of procedural fidelity; (b) the students with disabilities acquired the skills that were taught during peer tutoring; and (c) modifications of the procedure were required for 2 of the 3 students with disabilities, and the peers tutors were able to implement the modifications. Implications for practice and future research are described.     

PEER MODELING OF RESPONSE CHAINS: OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING BY STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

Peer models (classmates without disabilities) who were proficient in performing a task completed one response chain each day and described the steps they performed while their classmates with disabilities observed. Three students with disabilities participated, and their performance of the response chains was assessed immediately prior to and following the peer modeling each day. A multiple probe design across response chains, replicated across children with disabilities, was used. In addition, participation and social interactions of children with disabilities and their peer models were assessed in classroom activities after daily modeling sessions. The results indicate that the peer models performed the response chains accurately and quickly, and students with disabilities acquired the response chains. Across the study, participation in classroom activities was high, social interactions were low, and neither was affected by the peer modeling intervention.     

Effects of sleep deprivation on free-operant avoidance

Two studies examined effects of sleep deprivation on free-operant avoidance by rats. In Experiment 1, a 5-s shock-shock (SS) interval and 20-s response-shock (RS) interval produced baseline performances, which were reestablished after each experimental manipulation. Once baselines were established, animals were exposed to 24, 48, or 96 hr of sleep deprivation and equivalent periods of home cage and food restriction as a control condition. Compared to baseline, sleep deprivation increased response rates by increasing the proportion of brief interresponse times (IRTs); response rates changed little in the control conditions. Percentage of shocks avoided did not systematically change across conditions. In Experiment 2, the RS interval was manipulated (10, 20, and 40 s), while the SS interval (5 s) and level of sleep deprivation (48 hr) were held constant. Across RS intervals, sleep deprivation increased response rates via a shift toward brief IRTs. In addition, sleep deprivation increased the percentage of shocks avoided as an inverse function of RS intervals.     

Effects of daily probing on acquisition of instructive feedback responses

This study evaluated the effects of daily probes of instructive feedback stimuli on students' acquisition of two types of instructive feedback responses. Four students, two with disabilities, participated and were taught four sets of behaviors, two sets received daily probes and two sets did not. A modification of the multiple probe design across behaviors was used. The findings indicate that students acquired their target behaviors rapidly and maintained correct responding during subsequent probe conditions. Students also acquired both types of instructive feedback and maintained it across subsequent probe conditions. The daily probes of the instructive feedback stimuli did not appear to enhance acquisition or maintenance of the instructive feedback responses, but students appeared to acquire the instructive feedback responses while learning their target behaviors. The implications of this study for understanding how students learn instructive feedback responses and for practice are discussed.     

Instructive feedback: Review of parameters and effects

We present a review of the existing research on instructive feedback. Instructive feedback is a method of presenting extra, non-target stimuli in the consequent events of instructional trials (e.g., during praise statements). Students are not required to respond to those additional stimuli and are not reinforced if they do. The research is reviewed in terms of the characteristics of participants involved, the settings and instructional variables used, and the findings that emerged. The findings indicate that a wide range of students by age and disability were included and that most studies occurred in special education contexts. When used with response prompting procedures in a variety of direct instructional arrangements, students acquire and maintain some of the instructive feedback stimuli. Thus, teachers are encouraged to use instructive feedback in their direct instructional activities. Areas of future research include using instructive feedback in new contexts and examining methods for presenting instructive feedback. In addition, the use of instructive feedback to influence future learning and stimulus class formation should be investigated.