Working with elementary students with disabilities, we used alternating treatment designs to evaluate and compare the effects of 2 computer-based flash card sight-word reading interventions, 1 with 1-s response intervals and another with 5-s response intervals. In Study 1, we held instructional time constant, applying both interventions for 3 min. Although students completed 6 learning trials per word during each 1-s session and 2 trials per word during each 5-s session, results showed similar acquisition rates for 1-s and 5-s words.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFUsing alternating treatments designs, we compared learning rates across 2 computer-based flash-card interventions (3 min each): a traditional drill intervention with 15 unknown words and an interspersal intervention with 12 known words and 3 unknown words. Each student acquired more words under the traditional drill intervention. Discussion focuses on the need to account for instructional time when learning procedures are evaluated and compared.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF