TY - JOUR
T1 - Increasing opportunities to respond for students with internalizing behaviors
T2 - The utility of choral and mixed responding
AU - Messenger, Mallory
AU - Common, Eric Alan
AU - Lane, Kathleen Lynne
AU - Oakes, Wendy
AU - Menzies, Holly Mariah
AU - Cantwell, Emily D.
AU - Ennis, Robin Parks
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2017.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/8
Y1 - 2017/8
N2 - Increasing students’ opportunities to respond (OTR) is a low-intensity strategy effective in increasing engagement. Building on the work of Haydon and colleagues, we compared two types of OTR, choral and mixed (70% choral, 30% individual), to examine the utility of these strategies in increasing active student responding and accuracy during mathematics for two elementary-age students with internalizing behaviors. Results indicated the general education teacher implemented both OTR strategies with high fidelity with limited university support. However, results of this alternating treatment design were unable to distinguish either choral or mixed responding as superior to the other. Results suggested one student showed high active student responding with less than 80% accuracy, whereas the other student was highly accurate but responded less than 75% of the time. In the discussion, we highlight reasons why the two OTR strategies had similar effects on student outcomes, consider implications of these findings, and provide direction for future inquiry.
AB - Increasing students’ opportunities to respond (OTR) is a low-intensity strategy effective in increasing engagement. Building on the work of Haydon and colleagues, we compared two types of OTR, choral and mixed (70% choral, 30% individual), to examine the utility of these strategies in increasing active student responding and accuracy during mathematics for two elementary-age students with internalizing behaviors. Results indicated the general education teacher implemented both OTR strategies with high fidelity with limited university support. However, results of this alternating treatment design were unable to distinguish either choral or mixed responding as superior to the other. Results suggested one student showed high active student responding with less than 80% accuracy, whereas the other student was highly accurate but responded less than 75% of the time. In the discussion, we highlight reasons why the two OTR strategies had similar effects on student outcomes, consider implications of these findings, and provide direction for future inquiry.
KW - Academic engagement
KW - Low-intensity supports
KW - Null result
KW - Opportunities to respond
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044427076&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044427076&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0198742917712968
DO - 10.1177/0198742917712968
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85044427076
SN - 0198-7429
VL - 42
SP - 170
EP - 184
JO - Behavioral Disorders
JF - Behavioral Disorders
IS - 4
ER -