The taped-problems intervention: Increasing multiplication fact fluency using a low-tech, classwide, time-delay intervention

School Psychology Review

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 419-434

  McCallum, Elizabeth ^a   Skinner, Christopher H ^a   Turner, Haley ^a   Saecker, Lee ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750565376     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Ault, M. J., Wolery, M., Doyle, P. M., & Gast, D. L. (1989). Review of comparative studies in the instruction of students with moderate and severe handicaps. Exceptional Children, 55, 346-356.
2. Billington, E. J., & Ditommaso, N. M. (2003). Demonstrations and applications of the matching law in education. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 91-104.
3. Billington, E. J., Skinner, C. H., Cruchon, N. M. (2004). Improving sixth-grade students perceptions of high-effort assignments by assigning more work: Interaction of additive interspersal and assignment effort on assignment choice. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 477-490.
4. Bramlett, R. K., Murphy, J. J., Johnson, J., & Wallingford, L. (2002). Contemporary practices in school psychology: A national survey of roles and referral problems. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 327-335.
5. Browder, D. M., Hines, C., McCarthy, L. J., & Fees, J. (1984). A treatment package for increasing sight-word recognition for use in daily living skills. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19, 191-200.
6. Busk, P. L., & Marascuilo, L. A. (1992). Statistical analysis in single-case research: Issues, procedures, and recommendations, with applications to multiple behaviors. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single case research design and analysis (pp. 159-185. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Carpenter, P. A., & Moser, J. M. (1982). The development of addition and subtraction problem solving skills. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 9-24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Cates, G. L., & Rhymer, K. N. (2003). Examining the relationship between math anxiety and math performance. An instructional hierarchy perspective. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 23-34.
9. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 155-159.
10. Cuvo, A. J. (1979). Multiple-baseline design in instructional research: Pitfalls of measurement and procedural advantages. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 84, 219-228.
11. Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1977). Data-based program modification: A manual. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
12. Fleischner, J., Garnett, K., & Shepherd, M. (1982). Proficiency in arithmetic basic fact computation of learning disabled and nondisabled children. Focus on Learning Problems in Math, 4, 47-56.
13. Freeman, T. J., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1984). Effects of a taped-words treatment procedure on learning disabled students' sight-word reading. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 49-54.
14. Goldman, S. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1987). Information processing and elementary math. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 23-32.
15. Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In W. L. Reward, T. E. Heron, J. Trap-Porter, & D. S. Hill (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 58-88). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
16. Halle, J. W., Marshall, A. M., & Spradlin, J. E. (1979). Time delay: A technique to increase language use and facilitate generalization in retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 431-439.
17. Haring, N. G., & Eaton, M. D. (1978). Systematic instructional procedures: An instructional hierarchy. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The fourth K: Research in the classroom (pp. 23-40). Columbus OH: Merrill.
18. Hasselbring, T. S., Coin, L. I., & Bradsford, J. D. (1987). Developing automaticity. Teaching Exceptional Children, 1, 30-33.
19. Homer, D. R., & Baer, D. M. (1978). Multiple-probe technique: A variation of the multiple-baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 189-196.
20. Kratochwill, T. R., & Stoiber, K. C. (2002). Evidence-based interventions in school psychology: Conceptual foundations of The Procedural and Coding Manual of Division 16 and the Society for the Study of School Psychology Task Force. School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 341-389.
21. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
22. Logan, P., & Skinner, C. H. (1998). Improving students' perceptions of a math assignment by increasing problem completion rates: Is problem completion a reinforcing event? School Psychology Quarterly, 13, 322-331.
23. McCallum, E., Skinner, C. H., & Hutchins, H. (2004). The taped-problems intervention: Increasing division fact fluency using a low-tech self-managed time-delay intervention. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 20(2), 129-147.
24. McCurdy, B. L., Cundari, L., & Lentz, F. E. (1990). Enhancing instructional efficiency: An examination of time delay and the opportunity to observe instruction. Education and Treatment of Children, 13, 226-238.
25. McCurdy, M., Skinner, C. H., Grantham, K. Watson, T. S., & Hindman, P. M. (2001). Increasing on-task behavior in an elementary student during math seat-work by interspersing additional brief problems. School Psychology Review, 30, 23-32.
26. National Center for Educational Statistics. (2004). The nation's report card: Math highlights 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
27. Ownby, R. L., Wallbrown, F., D'Arti, A., & Armstrong, B. (1985). Patterns of referrals for school psychology services: Replication of the referral problems category system. Special Services in the School, 7(4), 53-66.
28. Poncy, B. C., Skinner, C. H., & O'Mara, T. (2006). Detect, practice, and repair: The effects of a class-wide intervention on elementary students' math fact fluency. Journal of Evidence Based Practices for Schools, 7, 47-68.
29. Shapiro, E. S. (2000). School psychology from an instructional perspective: Solving big, not little problems. School Psychology Review, 29, 560-572.
30. Shapiro, E. S. (2004). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
31. Skinner, C. H. (1998). Preventing academic skills deficits. In T. S. Watson & F. Gresham (Eds.). Handbook of child behavior therapy: Ecological considerations in assessment, treatment, and evaluation (pp. 61-83). New York: Plenum.
32. Skinner, C. H. (2002). An empirical analysis of inter-spersal research: Evidence, implications and applications of the discrete task completion hypothesis. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 347-368.
33. Skinner, C. H., Bamberg, H., Smith, E. S., & Powell, S. (1993). Subvocal responding to increase division fact fluency. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 49-56.
34. Skinner, C. H., Belfiore, P. J., Mace, H. W., Williams, S., & Johns, G. A. (1997). Altering response topography to increase response efficiency and learning rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 54-64.
35. Skinner, C. H., Belfiore, P. J., & Watson, T. S. (1995/ 2002). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 345-356
36. (Reprinted from Assessment in Rehabilitation and Exceptionality, 2, 207-220).
37. Skinner, C. H., Fletcher, P. A., & Henington, C. (1996). Increasing learning trial rates by increasing student response rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 313-325.
38. Skinner, C. H., Pappas, D., & Davis, K. (2005). Enhancing academic engagement: Providing opportunities for responding and influencing students to choose to respond. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 389-403.
39. Skinner, C. H., & Schock, H. H. (1995). Best practices in math assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (3rd ed.; pp. 731-740). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
40. Skinner, C. H., & Smith, E. S. (1992). Issues surrounding the use of self-managed interventions for increasing academic performance. School Psychology Review, 21, 202-210.
41. Skinner, C. H., Smith, E. S., & McLean, J. E. (1994). The effects of intertriai interval duration on sight-word learning during constant time delay. Behavioral Disorders, 19, 98-107.
42. Skinner, C. H., Turco, T. L., Beatty, K. L., & Rasavage, C. (1989). Cover, copy, and compare: An intervention for increasing multiplication performance. School Psychology Review, 18, 212-220.
43. Turco, T. L., & Elliott, S. N. (1986). Assessment of students' acceptability ratings of teacher-initiated interventions for classroom misbehavior. Journal of School Psychology, 24, 277-283.
44. Wildmon, M. E., Skinner, C. H., Watson, T. S., & Garrett, L. S. (2004). Enhancing assignment perceptions in students with math learning disabilities by including more work: An extension of interspersal research. School Psychology Quarterly, 19, 106-120.
45. Witt, J. C., & Martens, B. K. (1983). Assessing the acceptability of behavioral interventions. Psychology in the Schools, 20, 570-577.
46. Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., Doyle, P. M., & Gast, D. L. (1986). Comparison of instructional strategies: A literature review. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
47. Wong, B. Y. L. (1986). Problems and issues in definition of learning disabilities. In J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 3-26). New York: Academic Press.
48. Ysseldyke, J., Thill, T., Pohl, J., & Bolt, D. (2005). Using MathFacts in a Flash to enhance computational fluency. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 6, 59-89.