Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1177/00144029231174106
Jessica R. Toste, Elizabeth Talbott, Michelle M. Cumming
The Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Research (CEC-DR) is pleased to introduce a special issue designed to update and advance quality indicators for research in special education, advancing work originally published in a 2005 special issue of Exceptional Children (Volume 71, Issue 2). Then, as now, special education research has been characterized by a “long and cherished tradition” of diverse research methods (Graham, 2005, p. 135). Research methods in each area have advanced considerably since 2005. Thus, the articles in this 2023 special issue provide guidance for researchers who are conducting research that will continue to move the field of special education forward. The issue includes articles focused on quality indicators for group-design research, single-case-design research, secondary data analysis, systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods research (MMR), qualitative research, and evidencebased assessment. Moreover, these seven articles foreshadow how research methods will continue to evolve over the next decade, particularly in deepening understanding of equity and open-science practices. First in the issue is an article focused on quality indicators for group-design research. Jessica Toste, Jessica Logan, Karrie Shogren, and Brian Boyd provide an expanded set of indicators designed to advance knowledge about for whom and under what conditions interventions, programs, and practices are more or less effective for students with disabilities. The authors introduce new quality indicators to guide decisions related to the design, implementation, and analysis of research of groups of people in special education. Next, to advance quality indicators for single-case-design research, Jennifer Ledford, Joseph Lambert, James Pustejovsky, Nicole Hollins, and Erin Barton extend previous standards by providing guiding principles and recommendations that advance rigor in internal validity, generality and acceptability, and reporting. They also promote considerations for single-case synthesis, which has grown substantially since the 2005 quality indicators were published, and discuss how the field can assess accumulated evidence for certain practices or intervention approaches. The topic of the third article is new to this special issue. It introduces a series of recommendations for secondary data analysis. Allison Lombardi, Graham Rifenbark, and Ashley Taconet highlight preregistration as a tool for researchers to share innovative questions and analytic approaches as well as increase transparency. To that end, they describe quality indicators for secondary data analysis using applied examples from published studies based on two iterations of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS2 and NLTS2012). Michelle Cumming, Elizabeth Bettini, and Jason Chow propose four core principles to guide scholars in conducting high-quality systematic literature reviews: coherence, contextualization, generativity, and transparency. The authors d
{"title":"Special Issue Preview: Introducing the Next Generation of Quality Indicators for Research in Special Education","authors":"Jessica R. Toste, Elizabeth Talbott, Michelle M. Cumming","doi":"10.1177/00144029231174106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231174106","url":null,"abstract":"The Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Research (CEC-DR) is pleased to introduce a special issue designed to update and advance quality indicators for research in special education, advancing work originally published in a 2005 special issue of Exceptional Children (Volume 71, Issue 2). Then, as now, special education research has been characterized by a “long and cherished tradition” of diverse research methods (Graham, 2005, p. 135). Research methods in each area have advanced considerably since 2005. Thus, the articles in this 2023 special issue provide guidance for researchers who are conducting research that will continue to move the field of special education forward. The issue includes articles focused on quality indicators for group-design research, single-case-design research, secondary data analysis, systematic literature reviews, mixed-methods research (MMR), qualitative research, and evidencebased assessment. Moreover, these seven articles foreshadow how research methods will continue to evolve over the next decade, particularly in deepening understanding of equity and open-science practices. First in the issue is an article focused on quality indicators for group-design research. Jessica Toste, Jessica Logan, Karrie Shogren, and Brian Boyd provide an expanded set of indicators designed to advance knowledge about for whom and under what conditions interventions, programs, and practices are more or less effective for students with disabilities. The authors introduce new quality indicators to guide decisions related to the design, implementation, and analysis of research of groups of people in special education. Next, to advance quality indicators for single-case-design research, Jennifer Ledford, Joseph Lambert, James Pustejovsky, Nicole Hollins, and Erin Barton extend previous standards by providing guiding principles and recommendations that advance rigor in internal validity, generality and acceptability, and reporting. They also promote considerations for single-case synthesis, which has grown substantially since the 2005 quality indicators were published, and discuss how the field can assess accumulated evidence for certain practices or intervention approaches. The topic of the third article is new to this special issue. It introduces a series of recommendations for secondary data analysis. Allison Lombardi, Graham Rifenbark, and Ashley Taconet highlight preregistration as a tool for researchers to share innovative questions and analytic approaches as well as increase transparency. To that end, they describe quality indicators for secondary data analysis using applied examples from published studies based on two iterations of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS2 and NLTS2012). Michelle Cumming, Elizabeth Bettini, and Jason Chow propose four core principles to guide scholars in conducting high-quality systematic literature reviews: coherence, contextualization, generativity, and transparency. The authors d","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88744727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01DOI: 10.1177/00400599231171715
T. Fletcher, Alicia Chen, Ashlee Norris, Edgar Pizarro, Jason Tran, Megan Tripp
Autism and sensory-friendly events are an increasingly common feature of community life. One predictable aspect of these events is the presence of sensory havens, which serve as a respite or self-regulation zone for neurodiverse children, family, friends, and, occasionally, their service animals. When research evidence contributes to the design of these spaces, they can positively impact the length of time people attend events and the quality of their experiences. The authors detail autism architecture guidelines and sensory regulation research, and provide practical strategies for designing and operating havens.
{"title":"Guidelines for Sensory Havens in Autism and Sensory-Friendly Events","authors":"T. Fletcher, Alicia Chen, Ashlee Norris, Edgar Pizarro, Jason Tran, Megan Tripp","doi":"10.1177/00400599231171715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599231171715","url":null,"abstract":"Autism and sensory-friendly events are an increasingly common feature of community life. One predictable aspect of these events is the presence of sensory havens, which serve as a respite or self-regulation zone for neurodiverse children, family, friends, and, occasionally, their service animals. When research evidence contributes to the design of these spaces, they can positively impact the length of time people attend events and the quality of their experiences. The authors detail autism architecture guidelines and sensory regulation research, and provide practical strategies for designing and operating havens.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41565673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-22DOI: 10.1177/00144029231168106
The QR Collective*
Qualitative research (QR) has gained visibility and acceptance in the field of special education due to early efforts to identify quality indicators focused on technical and methodological aspects of QR. Whereas these indicators focused on credibility and trustworthiness of data, this article articulates additional QR quality indicators to enhance the value and power of researcher reflexivity as a means to expand the capacity of purpose- and equity-driven special education research. First, the need for reflexivity criteria is addressed. Next, reflexivity criteria are operationalized in key questions that engage researchers in self-reflection: (a) Why do QR? (b) By whom, for whom, and with whom is QR being conducted? and (c) Who is affected by the benefits and costs of QR? These questions encourage researchers to grapple with the complexity of experiences, outcomes, and structures associated with special education and ultimately advance more equitable policy and practice.
{"title":"Reflexive Quality Criteria: Questions and Indicators for Purpose-Driven Special Education Qualitative Research","authors":"The QR Collective*","doi":"10.1177/00144029231168106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231168106","url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative research (QR) has gained visibility and acceptance in the field of special education due to early efforts to identify quality indicators focused on technical and methodological aspects of QR. Whereas these indicators focused on credibility and trustworthiness of data, this article articulates additional QR quality indicators to enhance the value and power of researcher reflexivity as a means to expand the capacity of purpose- and equity-driven special education research. First, the need for reflexivity criteria is addressed. Next, reflexivity criteria are operationalized in key questions that engage researchers in self-reflection: (a) Why do QR? (b) By whom, for whom, and with whom is QR being conducted? and (c) Who is affected by the benefits and costs of QR? These questions encourage researchers to grapple with the complexity of experiences, outcomes, and structures associated with special education and ultimately advance more equitable policy and practice.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77979875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-22DOI: 10.1177/00400599231167816
Candace A. Mulcahy, Joseph Calvin Gagnon, V. Atkinson, Jason A. Miller
In the era of 21st century learning, many secondary students with learning disabilities continue to struggle with mathematics problem solving. Emerging evidence suggests self-regulated strategy development can be combined with existing evidence-based and promising practices during mathematics instruction. These practices include explicit instruction, metacognition, use of visual representations, ongoing formative assessment and feedback, multiple examples, and self-regulation. We describe the promising and practical potential of SRSD and STAR, a research-based, metacognitive problem-solving strategy, for instruction in algebraic problem-solving. A practical example is provided to illustrate the combination of practices.
{"title":"Self-Regulated Strategy Development for Algebra Problem Solving","authors":"Candace A. Mulcahy, Joseph Calvin Gagnon, V. Atkinson, Jason A. Miller","doi":"10.1177/00400599231167816","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599231167816","url":null,"abstract":"In the era of 21st century learning, many secondary students with learning disabilities continue to struggle with mathematics problem solving. Emerging evidence suggests self-regulated strategy development can be combined with existing evidence-based and promising practices during mathematics instruction. These practices include explicit instruction, metacognition, use of visual representations, ongoing formative assessment and feedback, multiple examples, and self-regulation. We describe the promising and practical potential of SRSD and STAR, a research-based, metacognitive problem-solving strategy, for instruction in algebraic problem-solving. A practical example is provided to illustrate the combination of practices.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47452890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1177/00144029231172175
Mark D. Samudre, Lauren M. LeJeune, E. J. Anderson, Jacqueline A. Viotto, Matthew E. Brock, Hannah Nichols
The success of teachers is tied to their effectiveness in managing student behavior. In this meta-analysis, we identified 49 single-case-design studies that evaluated the effectiveness of teacher training on their implementation of behavioral support strategies. Training was most often provided in a one-on-one format ( n = 18) and included ongoing coaching ( n = 20). Thirty-three of the 49 designs met What Works Clearinghouse standards with or without reservations. The overall between-case standardized mean difference effect size was d = 1.50. We analyzed and grouped teacher- and student-level outcomes as a result of training into five domains: (a) teacher-delivered praise ( d = 1.94), (b) teacher desirable behavior (e.g., treatment fidelity; d = 1.22), (c) teacher undesirable behavior (e.g., reprimands; d = 0.87), (d) student desirable behavior ( d = 1.88), and (e) student undesirable behavior ( d = 1.22). Across all studies, the combined nonoverlap of all pairs scores ranged from 0.37 to 1.0 ( M = 0.866). We discuss future areas of research as well as implications for teacher training in behavioral support implementation.
{"title":"A Meta-Analysis on Behavioral Support Training and General Education Teacher Implementation","authors":"Mark D. Samudre, Lauren M. LeJeune, E. J. Anderson, Jacqueline A. Viotto, Matthew E. Brock, Hannah Nichols","doi":"10.1177/00144029231172175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231172175","url":null,"abstract":"The success of teachers is tied to their effectiveness in managing student behavior. In this meta-analysis, we identified 49 single-case-design studies that evaluated the effectiveness of teacher training on their implementation of behavioral support strategies. Training was most often provided in a one-on-one format ( n = 18) and included ongoing coaching ( n = 20). Thirty-three of the 49 designs met What Works Clearinghouse standards with or without reservations. The overall between-case standardized mean difference effect size was d = 1.50. We analyzed and grouped teacher- and student-level outcomes as a result of training into five domains: (a) teacher-delivered praise ( d = 1.94), (b) teacher desirable behavior (e.g., treatment fidelity; d = 1.22), (c) teacher undesirable behavior (e.g., reprimands; d = 0.87), (d) student desirable behavior ( d = 1.88), and (e) student undesirable behavior ( d = 1.22). Across all studies, the combined nonoverlap of all pairs scores ranged from 0.37 to 1.0 ( M = 0.866). We discuss future areas of research as well as implications for teacher training in behavioral support implementation.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84790809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1177/00144029231171092
Elizabeth Talbott, Andres De Los Reyes, Devin M. Kearns, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez, Mo Wang
Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.
{"title":"Evidence-Based Assessment in Special Education Research: Advancing the Use of Evidence in Assessment Tools and Empirical Processes","authors":"Elizabeth Talbott, Andres De Los Reyes, Devin M. Kearns, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez, Mo Wang","doi":"10.1177/00144029231171092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231171092","url":null,"abstract":"Evidence-based assessment (EBA) requires that investigators employ scientific theories and research findings to guide decisions about what domains to measure, how and when to measure them, and how to make decisions and interpret results. To implement EBA, investigators need high-quality assessment tools along with evidence-based processes. We advance EBA in three sections in this article. First, we describe an empirically grounded framework, the Operations Triad Model (OTM), to inform EBA decision-making in the articulation of relevant educational theory. Originally designed for interpreting mental health assessments, we describe features of the OTM that facilitate its fusion with educational theory, namely its falsifiability. In turn, we cite evidence to support the OTM's ability to inform hypothesis generation and testing, study design, instrument selection, and measurement validation. Second, we describe quality indicators for interpreting psychometric data about measurement tools, which informs both the development and selection of measures and the process of measurement validation. Third, we apply the OTM and EBA to research in special education in two contexts: (a) empirical research for causal explanation and (b) implementation science research. We provide open data resources to advance measurement validation and conclude with future directions for research.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89661006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-12DOI: 10.1177/00400599221121721
Robin S. Codding, Corey Peltier, Jared Campbell
{"title":"Introducing the Science of Math","authors":"Robin S. Codding, Corey Peltier, Jared Campbell","doi":"10.1177/00400599221121721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599221121721","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43804825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-01DOI: 10.1177/00400599231171759
J. Travers, R. Pennington
Many interventions and supports rooted in applied behavior analysis have been established as evidence-based and high leverage practices for educating students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (e.g., Hume et al., 2021; Pennington et al., 2023). Unfortunately, despite decades of evidence and widespread availability of these practices, educators may consider other practices without research evidence to support their effectiveness. Unsupported practices may appear enticing to educators for myriad reasons, but their adoption puts students at risk for lack of achievement and other potential harms (Travers, 2017). The potentially negative impacts of adopting unsupported practices are magnified when they are used in the place of well-established practices to address the education-related needs for vulnerable populations of students, such as those who do not develop communication skills necessary to successfully navigate the world around them.
{"title":"Supporting Student Agency in Communication Intervention: Alternatives to Spelling to Communicate and Other Unproven Fads","authors":"J. Travers, R. Pennington","doi":"10.1177/00400599231171759","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599231171759","url":null,"abstract":"Many interventions and supports rooted in applied behavior analysis have been established as evidence-based and high leverage practices for educating students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (e.g., Hume et al., 2021; Pennington et al., 2023). Unfortunately, despite decades of evidence and widespread availability of these practices, educators may consider other practices without research evidence to support their effectiveness. Unsupported practices may appear enticing to educators for myriad reasons, but their adoption puts students at risk for lack of achievement and other potential harms (Travers, 2017). The potentially negative impacts of adopting unsupported practices are magnified when they are used in the place of well-established practices to address the education-related needs for vulnerable populations of students, such as those who do not develop communication skills necessary to successfully navigate the world around them.","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48535092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-01DOI: 10.1177/00400599231171758
Andreas Jasper
{"title":"Right Now Is a Good Time to Get Involved","authors":"Andreas Jasper","doi":"10.1177/00400599231171758","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599231171758","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46755669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-01DOI: 10.1177/00400599231186241
{"title":"Meet the 2023 Yes I Can Honorees","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/00400599231186241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599231186241","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46909,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Exceptional Children","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41276013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：